Gmo nepenthes

[jurow]

Well, what about it? Ive seen a few just like this on ebay.
Many times infact.

You have indeed. They were listed by me.

Sorry if the post was unclear. This is an example of a plant that exists outside the realm of this particular species' "natural perfection." The parent plant was selected in cultivation, and (based on the prices the divisions command) is 10-20x more valuable than a comparable non-variegated specimen. What do you think a variegated N. macrophylla or N. hamata would cost compared to a regular one? Inducing variegation (through selection, virus, artificial mutation, etc) is a relatively old horticultural trick to increase the value of plants. Now imagine the possibilities that will emerge as genetic modification becomes increasingly accessible. Hopefully that answers your question.

---------Edit---------
[MENTION=12066]emc2[/MENTION]: yep, that's the one.

 

[NemJones]

That did clear it up a little bit, thanks.

So in short, youre just modifying to make them look different, and jacking up price because of the differentiation?

 

[Benurmanii]

You have indeed. They were listed by me.

Sorry if the post was unclear. This is an example of a plant that exists outside the realm of this particular species' "natural perfection." The parent plant was selected in cultivation, and (based on the prices the divisions command) is 10-20x more valuable than a comparable non-variegated specimen. What do you think a variegated N. macrophylla or N. hamata would cost compared to a regular one? Inducing variegation (through selection, virus, artificial mutation, etc) is a relatively old horticultural trick to increase the value of plants. Now imagine the possibilities that will emerge as genetic modification becomes increasingly accessible. Hopefully that answers your question.

But this sort of genetic modification has a lot to do with chance as well. GMO Nepenthes (as in, selectively altering genetic code), I believe, would not even sell at a high price. Turns them more into a novelty than a work of art. Think of an easy growing GMO N. rajah, that anyone can keep alive on a windowsill. Sure, plenty of people would buy it, but eventually, people will turn to the real one, as part of the mystique of Nepenthes is being able to successfully grow the difficult ones.

 

[NemJones]

Turns them more into a novelty than a work of art.

I would say Both. However, Ive seen a few of those that Jurow posted go for a spectacular price tag.
Theyre stunning and unusual, which is why they are usually such head turners.


Thats half the reason I absolutely hate GMO critters. Its all about money, and on top of that, youre letting
artificially created life out into the natural world (possibly to propagate and mix with natural populations.)
I know others dont agree with me, But I feel this is a crime against nature and both sides should be segregated from
eachother.

I guess in the end, it all comes down to natural sugar, or artificial sweetener.
(IT just saddens me that nobody believes in the quarantine/segregation clauses.)

 

[jurow]

That did clear it up a little bit, thanks.

So in short, youre just modifying to make them look different, and jacking up price because of the differentiation?

No need for passive-aggression. I'm not "jacking" anything up. I listed those plants for the same $.99 starting price as every other auction I make. The market determines the value of these traits, and as a vendor it's in my best interest to provide the plants that customers perceive as valuable.

 

[Swagalotus]

No need for passive-aggression. I'm not "jacking" anything up. I listed those plants for the same $.99 starting price as every other auction I make. The market determines the value of these traits, and as a vendor it's in my best interest to provide the plants that customers perceive as valuable.

Getting off topic here.

I just think that GMOing cps would ruin their uniqueness. What makes them so cool (at least in my opinion) is that these plants evolved some amazing colors, shapes, and mechanisms all by themselves, and if humans were to interfere with them in a way that would not happen naturally, it would be ruining their "specialness"

 

[NemJones]

No need for passive-aggression. I'm not "jacking" anything up. I listed those plants for the same $.99 starting price as every other auction I make. The market determines the value of these traits, and as a vendor it's in my best interest to provide the plants that customers perceive as valuable.

Not trying to be agressive, Im just pointing out that the market moves like that. No agression intended, and I know that you started them that low.
Im just trying to show my point of how the market moves and why It does so. (I threw in a couple bids on those plants mind you!)

Getting off topic here.

I just think that GMOing cps would ruin their uniqueness. What makes them so cool (at least in my opinion) is that these plants evolved some amazing colors, shapes, and mechanisms all by themselves, and if humans were to interfere with them in a way that would not happen naturally, it would be ruining their "specialness"

This is also what im trying to get at. But it seems by human nature, people just want to modify it
and put their own personal touch into it because it just simply, wasnt good enough from the start.
Ill try to keep my further opinions out of this thread because i dont want to derail it further.

 

[nimbulan]

Getting off topic here.

I just think that GMOing cps would ruin their uniqueness. What makes them so cool (at least in my opinion) is that these plants evolved some amazing colors, shapes, and mechanisms all by themselves, and if humans were to interfere with them in a way that would not happen naturally, it would be ruining their "specialness"

Humans have already been altering animals and plants for thousands of years by way of selective breeding in ways that would not occur naturally. Most of our food, both animal- and plant- based, are human creations that often bear only a vague resemblance to the original naturally-occurring organisms.

Genetic modification is certainly faster, allows us to more easily target specific traits, and allows for greater modification than breeding for sure, but it's not such a giant leap.

 

[SFLguy]

Just want to clear something up, GMOs are organisms that have been changed by humans (whether by high tech means or selective breeding which has been done with Nepenthes)(or orchids or corn or watermelon etc)
GEO (genetically engineered organisms) are organisms that people have taken and changed the DNA of to include parts of the DNA of another organism

 

[nimbulan]

Just want to clear something up, GMOs are organisms that have been changed by humans (whether by high tech means or selective breeding which has been done with Nepenthes)(or orchids or corn or watermelon etc)
GEO (genetically engineered organisms) are organisms that people have taken and changed the DNA of to include parts of the DNA of another organism

I'm pretty sure that is incorrect. GMO specifically refers to organisms modified by genetic engineering, not by selective breeding.

Personally I'm starting to dislike the term since it has picked up a strong negative connotation during the debate about genetically modified food.

 

[SFLguy]

I'm pretty sure that is incorrect. GMO specifically refers to organisms modified by genetic engineering, not by selective breeding.

Personally I'm starting to dislike the term since it has picked up a strong negative connotation during the debate about genetically modified food.

That's just what I was taught. The reasoning was that any organism that has traits that would not be found in the wild would be an organism that has been genetically modified. (i.e bulldogs, domesticated cattle, and most of the fruits and vegetables that we eat today)

 

[naoki]

You'll need a basic mol. biol. lab for the transformation, so it's unlikely that hobbyists would do the transformation.

It looks like people have developed Agrobacterium (bacteria frequently used for plant transformation) gene delivery system for Drosera, and they inserted GFP (green florescent protein). Here is the abstract:
Transformation of sundew: pitfalls and promises - Springer

Here is the brief description of a bigger picture of the project describing the application of the technology:
Laboratoire Agronomie et Environnement: Milk Plants Technology

Here is the patent related to this:
Patent US8178749 - Process for the production of recombinant proteins using carnivorous plants - Google Patents

They mention about using Nepenthes for the harvest, but I didn't find anything showing the success of Nepenthes transformation.

I think that it could be a very interesting idea, and it will be interesting to see what will happen with it.

 

[hcarlton]

GMO at its most basic form does represent any form of modification from natural genetics; this does include selective breeding and hybridization. If you want a specific term for genetic engineering, try transgenics which is at the very least one of the proper scientific terms.

 

[SerMuncherIV]

The guys I talked to at USDA define "GMO" as any organism whose genome has been influenced directly by human activity, so that includes genetically engineered (GE) organisms as well as the products of crossbreeding/hybridization; for that reason, I ignore whatever Wikipedia has to say about the matter. Transgenic organisms are a specific type of GEs that contain DNA from a different species; organisms that have only had DNA removed or have had artificially lab-created DNA added through biotech lab techniques are genetically engineered but not transgenic. So yes, we have all been eating GMO food for our entire lives, regardless if it's GE or otherwise. Personally, I dislike how the term has picked up its negative connotation through radical lobbying groups that don't bother to do their research first.

 

[nimbulan]

I have to say I strongly disagree with the term GMO being used to refer to the products of selective breeding. As far as I know, the term did not exist before genetic engineering and every single definition for it I can find online says it only refers to the products of genetic engineering.

 

[hcarlton]

I have to say I strongly disagree with the term GMO being used to refer to the products of selective breeding. As far as I know, the term did not exist before genetic engineering and every single definition for it I can find online says it only refers to the products of genetic engineering.

It would be wise to investigate into decent scientific research then, because it doesn't matter whether or not you disagree with the usage when the grounded definition contradicts your opinion; the term "genetic modification" has been around a long, LONG time, nearly as long as we've known about DNA and genetic inheritance, and all the details and differences between genetic engineering, hybridization, selective breeding, transgenics, and other related terms have been well described and laid out in literature several times over. Had a very heated debate over this exact topic in my Plant Physiology class last semester (of which the class itself is taught by a doctoral professor who deals on a daily basis in physiology and genetic workings).

 

[nimbulan]

Sure the term genetic modification has been around but a long time, but we're specifically talking about the term "GMO." I keep searching and searching but still can't find a single reference stating that this term includes selective breeding, including in scientific papers. Isn't the whole point of the term to draw a distinction between natural processes (even man-guided natural processes) and artificial ones?

I'm not trying to say you guys are wrong, but if that's how it is in the scientific community it is not easy to find that information.

 

[SerMuncherIV]

The term "GMO" (genetically modified organism) started to be used around the late 20th century, when biotechnology was just starting to grow as a major pioneer industry. For this reason, media outlets misconstrue the term as applying to only GE organisms, even though the USDA (and many biotech textbooks for that matter) indicates that selective breeding and hybridization fall under biotechnology and the term "GMO". In the biotechnological literature that I've read, many of the authors don't seem to make this distinction very clear; they use the popularized term "GMO" to describe specifically GE or even more specifically transgenic organisms (although the practice is not incorrect).

I have however seen sites that use the term GMO (in my opinion) correctly, scarce though they are...

 

[Trout]

I wish I was a GMO. Somebody should go in and remove the gene for male-pattern baldness.

 

[Dalton]

There is a site here: Glowing Plant | Seeds where scientists have already created GMO glow in the dark plants. They have info about them on the site. The current plants aren't CP's, but when I emailed them, they said that they wanted to try a venus fly trap in the future, but it was more complicated than what they're doing now.

If anyone is looking into getting these, I'll tell you that as of this post they need a special soil. There was something, I can't remember because it's been a while since I looked into it, but you can't just plop them into a pot of dirt. They did say that they were close to getting them to where you could grow them like any other house plant. I think they have a rose that glows as well. They were on kickstarter. There is another company I think they support or let people know about that make a petunia that changes colors. They hope to GMO modify it to change colors on it's own based on a day night cycle, but currently you pour a beer into the plant basket and it changes colors for a couple of days before changing back.