Thanks for the introduction.

A few thoughts here. I agree, for most amateur gardeners I would reccomend op varieties, but those OP varieties which have been adapted to the places where they live. In the states we have agricultural extension offices, which should in fact be reccomending these varieties but often dont, instead we have extension offices which recomend the big name F1 often proprietary lines which leaves gardeneres with nihl in terms of information on alternative options. Purdue in Indiana is one of the worst, being tied closely to “big ag”.

This isn’t to say that F1′s don’t work, but it certainly doesn’t give anyone the impetitus to seek out the most sustainable and “organic” certified or not, methods of production. I also agree that by not supporting the companies which sell these lines we aren’t funding their research.

That said, I’m all about subversion, and as an amateur plant breeder (which all gardeners who save/select seed are by definition) if I see an F1 which money and research and good genes has gone into, I’m going to steal it, segregate it, and turn that set of genetics back over to the public domain for the sake of the people of the world. I’ve done it many times and others have as well, most notably Carol Deppe, Alan Kapuler, and Ken Ettlinger. This and information (like this blog) about where to find these newly bred OP lines hurts these companies more than boycotting vegetable seed which they comparitively make little money off of (as opposed to chemicals and field crops) and it also cuts the head off of the corporate snake by bypassing them and their cocktail of “solutions” completely. More gardeners should do this.

Make no mistake about it, the GMO and big ag guys are out there in cyberspace looking for opporotunities to discredit us and the self sustainable movement in general, or worse to subvert us, particularly this group which touts the idea of self sustainable agriculture coupled with the benefits of GMO. Von Mogel and Bio-Fortified I am talking to you! I know you will see that since you spend your time trolling quite a bit. Tell me this my friend, Is Alan Kapuler a “science denier”?

Now that that is out of the way.

Regarding OP corn and productivity and enhanced nutrition.

Many OP corns were designed to be “check planted” 48″ centers with 48″ spacing between plants, for many reasons, most of those old OP’s when spaced right will produce “tillers”, five or six of them, which, if spaced right, will give 3-4 good ears each, when intercropped with beans and squash the productivity of such a field is outstanding. So much so that from my reading I have found documentation of a mandan village with over 10,000 people which was able to feed it’s populous year round and sometimes storing food for two years off of less than 500 acres.

That being said, folks like Alan Kapuler, myself, and J. Sperro as well as Munk Begin have began introducing many new corn lines, thus far mostly sweet types, but many of them are much more productive than the old OPs and many of them have huge Anthocyanin production.

One problem with Anthocyanin production in corn however is that the deep red/purple/near black coloration is a double recessive which carries a genetic load which makes the plants a bit less productive, however this is easily compensated for by the inclusion of 25-40% white corn in a grex with the purple. This up’s production big time while also holding on to the valuable purple/anthocyanin traits.

Kapuler has recently began the breeding of a new sweet type crossed to chires baby popcorn, giving 4-6 ears, 6-8 inches long per plant of red/pink/purple colored sweet corn. I’m going to be doing some crosses of my own Astronomy Domine to chires baby for this very reason this year. In corn you always select for multiple small ears over one large ear almost invariably.

Many of us are now working with grain corns. Dave Christiansen has led us in the right direction, but let’s look at two grain corns from the “way back” machine which have limitless potential in the midwest.

Reids Yellow Dent…right spacing and your going to get 2-3 good ears which by mass selection will give you outstanding yields, intercropped you get amazing results.

University of Kentucky Tuxpeno. A tropical flint which had daylight sensitivity bred out of it by a retired corn doctor at the university of kentucky. So uniform as to act as a hybrid and withstanding planting densities on unamended soil similar to those of modern ag hybrids/GMO types. 3-6 ears per plant at 5-8 inches long, high protein, decent flour producer.

For cold climates take a look at a few varieties.

Italian Flints are amazingly productive for size and amount of space they take up along with Bear Island Flint and Painted Mountain. Grex them together and there are amazing possibilities.

In Europe we don’t have the luxury of seed companies or farmers competing against one another on a varietal level. We have seed laws here, with associated lists of permitted varieties. The contents of these lists are controlled by the large seed companies, who can effectively tell farmers what they have to grow, and varieties not on these lists are illegal. This is sort of our alternative to PVP, which we don’t have here.

Since you and Alan mention corn, let me say something about that.

Modern hybrid corn is often hailed as an agricultural miracle, with it’s huge yields (roughly 4x OP corn) and ease of cultivation. Certainly I know many people who rightfully point out that F1 corn is often much more reliable in the home garden, and in fact know of several people who have heirloom gardens, except they grow F1 corn. Some people also grow commercial broccoli varieties as well for the same reason. It’s worth pointing out there are some excellent heirloom broccolis now.

The secret of corn is often put down to the power of hybrid vigor. It’s of course also part of the secret that the uniform nature of F1s allow the plants to be grown close to one another, knowing they won’t crowd out each other because they will all grow at the same rate and to the same size.

The price of course is a lot of chemicals are needed. Corn is a heavy feeder, and when grown in such circumstances in large mono-cultures, diseases and insects also have to be controlled with chemicals. One of the most important consequences in this is the amount of energy that has to go into growing it, and the resulting greenhouse gases. I think most people would agree the environmental price paid for growing corn is not insubstantial.

You might think there is nothing bad to be said about the miracle of modern corn, but there is another point of view.

This point of view is that when hybrid corn was introduced in the 1920s, in fact OP corn was also undergoing changes and improvements. Hybrid corn was adapted to a large degree due to promotion from chemical companies, and by in large OP corn was dropped from commercial production. In fact, many people believe if development into OP varieties had continued and received the same level of support as the hybrid varieties, productivity would have eventually surpassed what hybrid corn now offers, without the need for nearly as many chemical and energy inputs.

When you talk about competition spurring breeding work farmers trying to grow the best tasting varieties, you have to think about it in this perspective. Are they really trying to develop something for the benefit of consumers? What about those of us who want organic sweet corn with a low carbon footprint? I personally wouldn’t mind some interesting colors, or maybe a variety high in anthocyanins.

Thanks for the comment!

I’m looking forward to hearing any more you have to add.

To others: Alan is also an accomplished plant breeder, and is also working on poultry. He runs a third generation farm where he produces his products for local Indiana markets.

I’m on my way out the door now, but I’m going to take another stab at what you’ve said later. Please check back.

Though now that I think about it, my (and my friends/colleagues’) experience is mostly in the California produce market and mainstream U.S. maize market – both of which are extremely competitive and have very innovative farmers. I know of lots of instances of entities gaming the system but have never heard any complaints about the (agronomic) quality of of the varieties released by seed companies (though lots of breeders and farmers resent Monsanto’s heavy handed legal department).

It sounds like you’ve seen good evidence to suspect there’s some conspiratorial stuff going on, which isn’t hard to believe. Companies certainly try to get away with whatever they can. It’s surprising though (and a shame) that your local potato growers don’t want to try the new variety. Industrial french fry growers in the U.S. probably wouldn’t take it either but our farmers market/restaurant contract growers would fall over themselves to try it…

I imagine we can at least agree that industrially-bred and raised crops taste terrible! Thanks for the interesting discussion.

The important piece of information I would like to share is:

Commercial GMO sweet corn is available to home gardeners in the US. BT sweet corn is becoming more common than you know.

I would take writing a book to fully address everything you’ve said here. I’ve written a lot on this in the past, but it’s not really organized as such. It’s an ongoing problem that I write on something like this, then years later the topic emerges but it’s a little different. There is a website specifically focused on this kind of thing called GRAIN: http://www.grain.org

You might try browsing the archives of this blog from a year or two ago, and see if you see anything interesting.

The short and not very well supported response is that mostly you are repeating the marketing of the seed companies, and a lot of what you say is very much disputed. You are basically speaking the line of the Green Revolution, and arguing on it’s behalf. You might try Googling on Green Revolution, and you will probably find a lot of the arguments against what you are saying.

Speaking on very general terms, and of course there are exceptions, there is not a lot of breeding for the home gardener, just commercial crops are remarketed. Your two different ideas are not really all that different, and not apples and oranges so to speak.

It’s difficult to breed for disease and pests, in the way you say, but far from impossible. The real issue is when it’s profitable.

In Europe we have a huge problem with Late Blight on commercial potato crops. The chemicals used to control this are getting stronger and stronger and less and less effective. Every year tons and tons of very toxic chemicals are dumped into the environment. The only answer is to develop resistant strains of potatoes, and according to recent industry reports, the only way is with GM technologies.

Well this year I’m going to plant some potatoes that are probably completely or mostly resistant to blight. According to others who have eaten them, they are delicious, and in any case it’s always possible to use the genetic material to produce more varieties with different tastes.

What’s my secret and why am I growing these? Well, I’m friends with a potato breeder who bred them on his own land. All around me this coming year the farmers will be growing traditional varieties, and spraying chemicals. None of the farmers or seed companies are interested in our potatoes, many times offers have been made to the seed companies.

Why are they not interested? There’s too much money in the chemicals they now use, and they want to use this as an excuse to introduce GM potatoes into Europe.

The chemicals used to control blight are being phased out in Europe, and there is some sign the seed companies have started their own breeding work. It’s pretty unlikely their new lines will be phased in until the very last minute. If they are not GM, probably the only reason will be because Tom proved GM potatoes weren’t necessary by breeding his own.

http://www.patnsteph.net/weblog/2009/06/oxford-2009-and-tom-wagner/

1) the philosophical/practical preference for “open source” gardening seeds of interesting (likely heirloom) varieties vs. foolproof one-size-fits-all gardening seeds ordered from a corporate seed magazine

2) the properties of seed meant to be planted in home gardens vs. the properties of seed meant to be turned into industrial commodities…

Comparing industrial and garden seed is really comparing apples and oranges. A lot of work has gone into breeding both but with totally different priorities (and economics) in mind.

A gardening potato (whether heirloom or Burpee) needs to have excellent taste and cooking characteristics and grow well in your local climate with your local pests. An industrial potato needs to uniform, capable of being machine-harvested, shipped great distances and be able to be made into fries profitably for about a dollar (and look and taste vaguely like a potato).

Industrial and garden seed are completely different animals. A lot of people work in cubicles, but no one decorates their homes with them…

All of the genetic engineering/chemical application stuff only applies to industrial seed. No GM gardening seed are currently sold (although there is GM industrial zucchini and papaya).

More specifically…

“In fact, many are intentionally susceptible to diseases in the way I just said, so they have to be treated with chemicals”

It’s an *incredibly* difficult thing to breed plant varieties that are resistant to pests and pathogens while maintaining basic agronomic, shipping and presentation quality traits – not least because the pests and pathogens keep evolving! Furthermore, there’s no way that any company would get away with intentionally “breaking” a variety to require chemical application. That’s like saying a car company could make money by switching to shoddy paint and selling annual protective sprays. Monsanto may be ahead of the pack but it doesn’t have a monopoly and it would be foolish to think that massive internationals like DuPont, Syngenta, BASF and Dow can’t defend their slice of the market.

“Since they make more money when they sell the chemicals together with the seeds, the varieties are often bred to be dependent on chemicals, and totally unsuitable for organic home gardens.”

I think it’s true that Monsanto makes more money selling Roundup than it does Roundup-ready crops, but none of these plants have been bred to be “dependent” on chemicals. Herbicide is the cheapest way to control weeds over hundreds of acres. Labor costs are simply too high to rely on it for anything but high-value specialty crops. Farmers don’t buy Roundup because they have to. They buy it because it’s better than atrazine.

“Maybe the most important difference between commercial and non-commercial varieties, are that commercial varieties are not bred for specific climates. In fact much of the seed is produced in China, far away from home gardens in Europe and the US.”

Commercial seeds are always mass produced in different parts of the world than they’re sold (to prevent pest, pathogen and genetic contamination), but they’re BRED exactly where they will be sold. There’s a reason why Monsanto, Pioneer and Dow all have their headquarters in the Midwest. Millions of dollars are spent optimizing each commercial seed variety for its target climate. I actually heard a talk recently from a scientist from Dow about how they’re breeding some maize varieties specifically for upstate New York to tap into the dairy silage market. I don’t know how much of a priority commercial garden seed breeders place on environment – but most seed magazines include “heat tolerant” and “cold tolerant” versions of many crops.

Labelling of hybrids is not as transparent as you might think. There is a federal law that requires it in the US, but some states and foreign countries don’t. It’s also up to the USDA to enforce this, and they often have better things to do, and seed companies sometimes flagrantly ignore the rules.

It’s often the intention of seed companies to mislead their customers, by way of marketing or mislabelling. It can work to their advantage to trick someone into saving F1 seeds, because they get frustrated and go back to buying new seeds every year.

It’s much more of a sure thing to choose a seed company that only sells OP varieties.

To be clear, I don’t have any specific information to led me to believe that Johnny’s doesn’t correctly label their seeds as F1, but in general this is not something you can count on.

I’ve heard correctly labelling of F1s can sometimes work the other way, for example Burpee was apparently caught mislabelling some OP seeds as F1, apparently because they thought they could ask more money for them.

“When you’re saving seeds, you also need to know which ones are open pollinated. They also don’t label this.”
Are you referring to open pollination vs hybrid seed? If so, hybrid seeds are clearly labeled F1.

For what it’s worth, I don’t put a lot of value in certified organic seeds either.

Like I’ve just said to Matt above:

‘The more important your crop is, the more you need a good seed company.’

is also a reason I grow heirloom varieties, save my own seeds and avoid commercial ones.

It’s US law that you have to germination test your seed before you sell it, and it has to meet certain requirements.

Of course there are good and bad seed companies, commercial and non-commercial. Of course getting good seeds is important too, for anyone. I don’t think there’s anything about commercial varieties that make them more reliable. Most of us have home gardens, and can tolerate the occasional crop failure, but if not I would certainly advise insuring you get your seeds from a reputable company, one way or another.

That’s the same reason I grow heirloom varieties!

‘most people just want hardy plants that will “work” without a lot of fuss’.

I’ll bet you use Windows on your computer too. Can you guess I use Linux?

There are lots of arguments that can be made both ways, but for commercial seed varieties and Windows the arguments are mostly commercial and marketing in nature. Everyone has their preferences of course, but for better or worse, this blog was set up to promote non-commercial seed varieties, and this is without a doubt what I prefer using.

A company like Johnny’s cannot be trusted to label their seeds accurately for what they are. For example, a number of their seeds come from Monsanto/Seminis. Do they label these, so you can avoid buying them if you want?

When you’re saving seeds, you also need to know which ones are open pollinated. They also don’t always label this correctly.

It’s not really a useful solution to try to get this sort of information from customer service, you can never really be sure if they are telling the truth or even just making a mistake. The only real practical way to avoid buying Seminis/Monsanto seeds, or open pollinated seeds, is to buy them from a company you know doesn’t stock them, usually one that states this as a public policy.

I understand a lot of people like Johnny’s, and if you do and want to buy from them that’s okay with me. For me there is nothing interesting about them, and lots of other better places to buy seeds from.

Thanks for the link Cynthia!