top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 242 points 5 days ago (12 children)

Without even opening the article, let me guess. Industrial farming ruins the soil and so the crop can’t absorb the nutrients because they’re just not there? Almost like large-scale profit-first thinking comes back to bite our collective arses like it fucking consistently does in all other areas of life?

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 92 points 5 days ago (5 children)
  • [–] 57 points 5 days ago (3 children)

    I'm so surprised! I don't think this is news on account of this being the stuff my mother babbled about 26 years ago when she was re-schooling into botany.

    It's why people talk about small scale agriculture and permacultures.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago

    It's why people talk about small scale agriculture and permacultures.

    Not sure small scale farming really solves that, but one reason for perms cultures and agroforestry is they're more resilient and require less water to produce the same quantity of food.

    Agro forestry is a concept which is getting way too little focus, considering the risk of large scale draughts becoming more common

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    I think even if you took profit out of this we'd still have this problem (might be more inclined to fix it though). We need to feed a lot of people. to do that efficiently high yield is needed causing the areas where we farm to become over farmed and the vegetables bred to be larger rather than nutrition focused.

    Apparently normal plowing (the thing we've been doing for millenia) can damage the soil and reduce the nutrients going to the crops.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago

    There is the elephant in the room; the majority of land dedicated to agriculture, that's both land for grazing and land for growing food, is dedicated to raising and feeding animals. I think the number is around 80%, with the amount of land dedicated to growing food is somewhere around 45%?

    We're wasteful with vegetables and the like already, when we are wasteful with meat, we're also throwing away all the input that went into the chain prior to it.

    I don't like to dictate what people should eat. I was born and raised a lacto-ovo vegetarian, and nowadays I'm almost entirely plant based. Switching over to a plant based diet was easy for me, there wasn't much to switch out. I also in general loathe when people try to fuss over others food, I was on the receiving end of that all the time as a kid and it's incredibly tiring.

    That said, reducing our dependence on animal agriculture would be a boon to the world.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    Interesting. I would have assumed that it was all the science providing bigger vegetables, but that more volume wasn’t scaling linearly with more nutrition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 days ago

    So, I'm a software developer and what knowledge I have of this is primarily due to just being a kid of a botanist who deeply cared about the subject, and spending lots and lots of time out growing food because we were poor and needed to eat. When your life depends on something, you learn as much as you can about it.

    Breeding plants to be larger and consume more is probably a factor. Mistreating the soil is probably a bigger factor than people expect, though.

    It's easy to think of soil as just a substrate, since we can't really see it or navigate it it's hard to properly visualise it. It consists of several strata, all with different properties. Healthy soil is full of bacteria, fungi, and little insects that live and die in it. All their activity help bring about nutrients and process the soil, aerate it. A lot of people are shocked to discover that the roots of plants also need air.

    Industrial agriculture focuses a lot on big monocultures. As much as possible you want a field to have a single crop and nothing else. Herbicides are used to kill off anything that isn't the wanted crop, pesticides are used to kill off whatever might want to feast on the crop, fungicides... etc. Then we spread loads of nutrients over the field in the hope of replenishing whatever the crops drain from the soil.

    It works to an extent. A lot of nutrients just run off into surrounding areas and waters, it's one of the reasons the Baltic Sea is basically dead.

    Different plants have different properties. We mostly just see the top of plants, but like ice bergs a significant portion of them exists underground. Different plants have different root systems, some spread wide in the topsoil and help bind it together, preventing runoff and erosion. Some have really long roots (tap roots, like dandelion), reaching deep into the soil, pulling up minerals (nutrients) from the far reaches and eventually when they die, they get dispersed among the topsoil. Some fix nitrogen from the atmosphere, and bind it into the soil when they die and break down.

    With big industrial monocultures, you lose all of that. There's nothing to hold the soil in place, there's nothing to pull nutrients across strata, there's no ecosystem to constantly process and enrich the soil for you.

    The plants all evolved together, and just like animals they competed for different niches. Some animals eat vegetable matter on the ground, some evolved tall statures and long necks to reach further up. Some plants evolved wide root networks to absorb nutrients from a large area, some evolved long roots to penetrate deeper into the earth where other plants can't reach.

    There's also fungi and bacteria everywhere, they live in the root systems, doing their work and helping the plants out, similarly to how we have bacteria in our guts.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 87 points 4 days ago (8 children)

    This is well-known, just not widely discussed.

    It's a combination of soil being depleted from micro minerals, and every plant is bred for yield, not flavor or nutrition.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 days ago (4 children)

    Yeild, plus….shelf life, ability to withstand shipping, size, and looks.

    Not flavor… unless sugary. Things like grapes, apples, or carrots have gotten crazy sweet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 days ago (3 children)

    Where I am it's not even sweet. It's just tasteless. The bananas are grey, the apples have no flavor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    "not flavor"

    This one hit;s hard. I was getting seeds at a food bank to grow peppers. I went on to say, oh you need to starve them of water (increasing potency) and the twat told me "I guess you're not hungry enough" sigh the whole point of hot peppers is to flavor that potato I was going to eat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 106 points 5 days ago* (8 children)

    I feel like we already knew this was caused by poor soil quality? Like, we fertilize fields with ammonium nitrate, urea, and diammonium phosphate. You'll notice there's no potassium, magnesium, zinc, iron, or copper being added back. There's less in every harvest.

    The good news is that we already have the tools to fix this, in breeding, soil health, markets and policy.

    There's literally nothing breeding can do to add micro-nutrients back to our food, and markets got us to this point.

    The only solution is policy targeting soil health, and that's it.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 66 points 4 days ago (5 children)

    You can’t continue to farm on the same land season after season. The soil needs to regenerate. Rotational farming practices is the key not dumping nitrogen into the soil and constant tilling. You get zero water retention and poor soil health / biome.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    I learned something new today...

    Crop rotation is a required practice, in the United States, for farms seeking organic certification.[24] The “Crop Rotation Practice Standard” for the National Organic Program under the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, section §205.205, states that

    Farmers are required to implement a crop rotation that maintains or builds soil organic matter, works to control pests, manages and conserves nutrients, and protects against erosion. Producers of perennial crops that aren’t rotated may utilize other practices, such as cover crops, to maintain soil health.[13]

    (From Wikipedia article on Crop Rotation)

    I had never realized that. I generally don't pick organic because I believe that, for the most part, the majority of "organic" farming is mostly marketing geared at anti-science people, and fully organic farming is not scalable enough to replace modern ag.

    But that's definitely a tick in the "pro" column.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 3 days ago

    The article talks about zinc and selenium, which are metallic elements that are not regenerated in soil on seasonal timescales. We'd need millions of years for the crust to renew and dredge up more rocky sources from the mantle. It is a mass balance problem - each bit of zinc in the wheat you eat used to be out in the field, but now it is in your body until you excrete it as waste .. then it probably ends up in the ocean or a landfill depending on where your water treatment plant is. Very little waste is recovered for fertilizer.

    The solution here is going to be more fertilizers, not less, with micronutrients sourced from mines with richer deposits than the soil holds. The only other solution is moving food production to virgin land, which means destroying even more nature and will ruin that soil as well in time.

    See also phosphorous, which the world is rapidly running out of. Phosphorous is regenerated through sedimentation in the ocean crust, and subsequent tectonic activity moving that crust to the surface. There's less than a century of phosphate rock reserves left. Fertilizers won't even be an option in this case, and it is a slow-motion emergency.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    This isn't really true. The need to move land is caused by western farming practices. Food forests can operate on the same land indefinitely as they did for native americans for millenia because they are a mix of plants that keep the soil well regulated. They also produce more food per acre than monocultures. They're just more labor intensive to harvest. You can't use machines you have to pick things by hand.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 days ago

    I was specifically talking about monoculter farms and the reason for nutrient loss in plants. You don’t see a dip in nurrient loss (or as much) on organic farms or farms that practice regenerative farming practices and permiculture.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 45 points 5 days ago (5 children)

    Capitalism, where we ruin everything and never stop to ask whether it's a bad idea. But don't worry y'all. In a few short years we could be sharecroppers on Mars. I'm sure the soil there is fine!

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 days ago

    I started looking into food gardening back when covid began. I'm not anywhere near being self sufficient in vegetables, and the price can barely compete with stores, but I've learned a lot and it really tastes a lot better. That alone is worth the effort.

  • source
  • [–] 44 points 5 days ago

    Agricultural collapse has taken down more than one civilization.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 4 days ago* (3 children)

    The good news is that we already have the tools to fix this, in breeding, soil health, markets and policy.

    Why isn't composting part of the solution? If those minerals aren't going into our bodies then they should at least be returned to the soil instead of to the dump.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 4 points 3 days ago (2 children)

    I've heard a lot about intensive farming. Not a fan, but it doesn't come from nowhere. Artificial fertilizer and intensive farms mean more people can be fed with less land, less deforestation.

    Monocrops didn't come from nowhere either, not everywhere can grow everything.

    But wow we have fucked things up.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 days ago

    This is it. Supplimenting nitrogen, phosphorus, and potash means we can grow far more macronutrients to feed far more people than before. Letting fields follow, growing no food for years, lets the soil recover all the micronutrients mentioned in the article, but at the cost of reduced calories (Proteins, Carbohydrates, and Fats) produced per agricultural acre. And those are the things that feed hungry people. Doing more grazing and better fertilizers can help around the edges, as would simply fortifying foods directly. Thats how we cured rickets, after all.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 22 points 4 days ago (3 children)

    Micronutrient pools are largely controlled by mineral weathering. Here, they've depleted these pools by intensive agriculture. The pools are slow to replenish, which is why we are pinched now with less nutrition in vegetables

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 days ago (2 children)
  • [–] 9 points 4 days ago (1 child)

    Basically, the mineral components in the soil - whatever rock the soil particles came from - undergo chemical and physical degradation, releasing micro nutrients bound within them.

    Potassium is a good example even though it's a macro nutrient - the mechanism is the same for the most part

    Rock is the slowest but largest pool of nutrients like K. With K in particular, clays can bind it and desorb it depending on clay type and hydration status. That K is generally more available to the plants.

    Think of it this way: you have a mountain with diamonds in it, and a pick axe. That's your mineral K. You can chip away and get more diamonds but it's hard to do so and time consuming.

    There's also a smaller pile of diamonds that you can just sell to people. That's your available K.

    Then there is diamonds you are getting polished, that can later be sold. That's your clays

    https://nutrien-ekonomics.com/news/how-can-the-nature-of-clays-in-your-soil-affect-plant-available-potassium/

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 18 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

    Given I can’t change agricultural practices on my own but I can change what and where I buy, is there anyway to buy more nutritious vegetables?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 4 days ago

    You can buy produce labeled as organic or Bio depending on where you are. You can also support your local farmer's market. There's a small traditional farm close to where I live that lets you harvest tomatoes yourself in the summer and they definitely taste very different from the ones at the discounter.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 days ago (1 child)

    I'm surprised no one posted a link of this old Veratasium video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl_K2Ata6XY).

    Sorry about this being a YT link. I wish he'd co-publosh elsewhere, but oh well.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›