Image
coolplanet
Annual grains feed the world, but they create problems. Perennials are thrifty. Their long roots hold on to soil, water, and fertilizer, which means less pollution.


Humans made an unwitting but fateful choice 10,000 years ago as we started cultivating wild plants: We chose annuals. All the grains that feed billions of people today—wheat, rice, corn, and so on—come from annual plants, which sprout from seeds, produce new seeds, and die every year. "The whole world is mostly perennials," says USDA geneticist Edward Buckler, who studies corn at Cornell University. "So why did we domesticate annuals?" Not because annuals were better, he says, but because Neolithic farmers rapidly made them better—enlarging their seeds, for instance, by replanting the ones from thriving plants, year after year. Perennials didn't benefit from that kind of selective breeding, because they don't need to be replanted. Their natural advantage became a handicap. They became the road not taken.

Today an enthusiastic band of scientists has gone back to that fork in the road: They're trying to breed perennial wheat, rice, and other grains. Wes Jackson, co-founder and president of the Land Institute in Salina, Kansas, has promoted the idea for decades. It has never had much money behind it. But plant breeders in Salina and elsewhere are now crossing modern grains with wild perennial relatives; they're also trying to domesticate the wild plants directly. Either way the goal is crops that would tap the main advantage of perennials—the deep, dense root systems that fuel the plants' rebirth each spring and that make them so resilient and resource efficient—without sacrificing too much of the grain yield that millennia of selection have bred into annuals.

We pay a steep price for our reliance on high yields and shallow roots, says soil scientist—and National Geographic emerging explorer—Jerry Glover of the Land Institute. Because annual root crops mostly tap into only the top foot or so of soil, that layer gets depleted, forcing farmers to rely on large amounts of fertilizers to maintain high yields. Often less than half the fertilizer in the Midwest gets taken up by crops; much of it washes into the Gulf of Mexico, where it fertilizes algae blooms that cause a vast dead zone around the mouth of the Mississippi. Annuals also promote heavy use of pesticides or tillage because they leave the ground bare much of the year. That allows weeds to invade.

Above all, leaving the ground bare after harvest and plowing it in planting season erodes the soil. No-till farming and other conservation practices have reduced the rate of soil loss in the U.S. by more than 40 percent since the 1980s, but it's still around 1.7 billion tons a year. Worldwide, one estimate put the rate of soil erosion from plowed fields at ten to a hundred times the rate of soil production. "Unless this disease is checked, the human race will wilt like any other crop," Jackson wrote 30 years ago. As growing populations force farmers in poor countries onto steeper, erodible slopes, the "disease" threatens to get worse.

Perennial grains would help with all these problems. They would keep the ground covered, reducing erosion and the need for pesticides, and their deep roots would stabilize the soil and make the grains more suitable for marginal lands. "Perennials capture water and nutrients 10 or 12 feet down in the soil, 11 months of the year," Glover says. The deep roots and ground cover would also hold on to fertilizer—reducing the cost to the farmer as well as to the environment.

The perennial wheat-wheatgrass hybrid now growing at the Land Institute can already be made into flour. Yields are too low to compete with annual wheat in Kansas—but maybe not in Nepal, which has steeper slopes and a harsher climate, and where a researcher is now testing perennial hybrids in small plots. Amber waves of perennial grain may be decades away, but the emergence of cheap DNA sequencing is allowing plant breeders to work much faster than they used to. Buckler thinks that for a tiny fraction of the billions spent annually on corn research, one could create field-testable perennial corn in as little as ten years. "I think we should take a shot at revolutionizing agriculture," he says.
  1. groups:
    Community,   Tech,   Green,   Culture,   4 more
  2. tags:
    Crops neolithic
  3.     
    |

17 comments // Perennial Grains

  • gardener52
  • ecoalex
    • +1
      ecoalex  
    • My animal feed is 50-50; OP corn and alfalfa.Corn of course is an annual, if the crop residue is incorporated into the soil ,it actually builds the soil's organic matter.Alfalfa is a perennial, and a valuable protein ,mineral source in feed.I've tried to have others use my feed recipe ,but the old grain only habit is hard to break.My feeds for poultry,hogs,are about 75% ground alfalfa and 25% corn,plus kelp and minerals.The quality of the meat is better than the grain only diet.It's close to a pastured diet,the alfalfa was growing a few days before.In my area,pasturing animals is out of the question due to predators.

      I no-till oats (annual) dryland in the Ca foothills.for a hay crop.Drilling on the contour,reduces erosion to nil.Since there is some surface residue wind erosion also is greatly reduced.We don't have rain April to October ,so a perennial oat would be out of the question for dryland oats for me.

    • 5 months ago
  • circlesquared
    • +2
      circlesquared  
    • an excellent example of acting through right action after consideration and understanding. Bio-Organics and Permaculture are derived from the same source...let's make it our future.

    • 5 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • +2
      JanforGore  
    • Perennials would be better for soil health. But beware of Monsanto, DOW and others looking to genetically modify wheat as well. They also have great influence at the university level.

    • 5 months ago
  • coolplanet
  • MSII
    • +1
      MSII  
    • JanforGore:

      So very true! At the beginning of the bio-tech revolution there was a lot of talk and beginnings of work to create new crops that wouldn't need the fertilizers and pesticides of today's factory farming. Well these big companies put a end to that! Bought the start-ups out and said, you know that sounds all well and good, but we think creating plants that can handle even -MORE- fertilizers and pesticides is the way to go! As these companies that created the seed, also made the chemicals they weren't about to see and end (or lessening of the use of their chemicals).

    • 5 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • coolplanet:

      Might be. The repercussions regarding it being contaminated by GM crops is however still something to be considered... but in that case it might be much harder for them to sue the farmer and pawn off the blame.

    • 5 months ago
  • JanforGore
    • 0
      JanforGore  
    • MSII:

      Yes, it wasn't about the seed but finding a way to dump the war chemicals they had in residual stocks. These companies have absolutely nothing to do with sustainable agriculture. It is time for farmers to take back their seeds and their farms. It is one of the primary ways we have to heal the planet.

    • 5 months ago
  • artemis6
  • coolplanet
  • coolplanet
  • COMMONSENSEFORCOMMONGOOD_COM
  • coolplanet
  • artemis6
  • coolplanet
    • +1
      coolplanet  
    • artemis6:

      It certainly looks like a GREAT possibility!
      Seems like they're already doing it. I want to get involved in my own garden.
      I've always considered annuals to be a major pain in the ass.....:)

    • 5 months ago
  • artemis6
    • +2
      artemis6  
    • coolplanet:

      So true , i use the no til method , and every year , ya gotta do it again .... Except for my sunflowers (which replant themselves like crazy) raspberries , parsley and camomile ....

    • 5 months ago
  • coolplanet
    • +3
      coolplanet  
    • After reading Jaded Diamond's landmark 'Guns, Germs & Steel' I have seen the Neolithic Revolution some 10,000 years ago as a wrong turn in human evolution, bringing deforestation, overpopulation, malnutrition, famines and epidemics in it's wake.
      The hunter-gatherer lifestyle is much healthier for people and the planet.
      I'm not suggesting we go back to the caves. But this idea of perennial grains could very well turn us around as a species who have lived lightly upon the Earth for hundreds of thousands of years until now.

    • 5 months ago
more from Tech:

top videos