Home   |   News   |   Discussion Forum   |   Books   |   Curiosity Shop
Discussion Forum
Science Talk
Discuss scientific conundrums with our motley band of bamboozled boffins.
Latest Posts
Why is our blood red
by janelee
0 seconds ago
Unified Field Theory?
by TheodoreToth
Today at 08:41 PM
CFL - tempers in the house of (representatives ? )
by paul
Today at 08:10 PM
a serious question to the forum
by paul
Today at 07:22 PM
The Concept of the Whole and Threadism
by Revlgking
Today at 11:45 AM
Search
Custom Search
Sponsored Links
Most Read
Hormones gone wild
Homo superior
New IPCC climate warning
In space, no one can hear you say "doh!"
Bow to your insect overlords!
Penis enlargement surprise: it's possible
Sex and the schizoid factor
Delusions and mental illness
We come in peace – not!
Eeew!
Small penis syndrome a big problem?
Have you hugged your robot today?
Down on the farm - yields, nutrients and soil quality
Cat parasite has global ambitions
Pop goes the planet
The disappearing male
Missing link a tripping chimp?
Inorganic dust formations alive?
Science Shopping
Sci Shop
Peculiar scientific stuff that you didn't even know existed and you don't need.
News And Research

Physics

Climate Change

Space

Natural World

Health

Technology



All 2009 News

Science Books
Book Reviews
Rusty Rockets reviews this week's science titles and lists his all-time faves.
Archives
2009 2008 2007
2006 2005 2004
2003 2002 2001
2000 1999 1998
Discussion Archive
Feature Archive


3 December 2004
Nutrients Being Bred Out Of Modern Crops
by Kate Melville

A study of 43 garden crops led by a biochemist from the University of Texas suggests that the nutrient value of crops has declined in recent decades. The study was designed to investigate the effects of modern agricultural methods on the nutrient content of foods. The researchers chose garden crops, mostly vegetables, but also melons and strawberries, for which nutritional data were available from both 1950 and 1999 and compared them both individually and as a group.

The study - led by Dr. Donald Davis - appears in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition.

According to Davis, establishing meaningful changes in nutrient content over a 50-year time interval was a significant challenge. "It is much more reliable to look at average changes in the group rather than in individual foods, due to uncertainties in the 1950 and 1999 values," Davis said. "Considered as a group, we found that six out of 13 nutrients showed apparently reliable declines between 1950 and 1999."

These nutrients included protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin and ascorbic acid. The declines, which ranged from 6 percent for protein to 38 percent for riboflavin, raise significant questions about how modern agriculture practices are affecting food crops. "We conclude that the most likely explanation was changes in cultivated varieties used today compared to 50 years ago," Davis said. "During those 50 years, there have been intensive efforts to breed new varieties that have greater yield, or resistance to pests, or adaptability to different climates. But the dominant effort is for higher yields. Emerging evidence suggests that when you select for yield, crops grow bigger and faster, but they don't necessarily have the ability to make or uptake nutrients at the same, faster rate."

According to Davis, these results suggest a need for research into other important nutrients and foods that provide significant dietary calories, such as grains, legumes, meat, milk and eggs. "Perhaps more worrisome would be declines in nutrients we could not study because they were not reported in 1950 - magnesium, zinc, vitamin B-6, vitamin E and dietary fiber, not to mention phytochemicals," Davis said.



Home            News            Discussion Forum            Books            Curiosity Shop            About

The terms and conditions governing your use of this website.
Copyright © 1997 - 2009 Science a Go Go and its licensors. All rights reserved.