I thought lemon juice was all that was needed to retard browning? Or maybe i'm thinking about avocados. Market will decide if they are a success or not. If no one buys them, then they'll fold.

Well I don't really have an opinion on the apple but do on the techniques used to make it. The technology is super important for medical research.

Some friends of mine have Cystic Fibrosis and the only hope is for GMO technology to advance to the point where healthy genes can be inserted into their genome. Without people developing things, new discoveries are not made. So I'm all for the research. This is exciting because they were able to achieve an enzyme reduction, this alone could stop excess secretions by mucus membranes. The technique is very promising. Research is expensive, anyway it can be done is OK by me.

I'm a GMO fan as well- although not all its products by any means, but that may be a subject for another forum because it winds up becoming an endless debate.

I'd rather have an apple genetically modified to repel insects- but only if it was a triple lock they could not break for at least half a century. BT corn took only 10 years for weevils to break the "lock" and it is now virtually worthless in much of the midwest or soon to be. Monsanto already made their money though. I expect they pretty much knew this would happen.

The problem with these advances, and let us face it, pest resistance is the main reason for GMO research, is that the way to "improve" the crop is to make it more toxic to insects. They do not have a big playbook these Monsanto scientists, this is pretty much it.

We have some data now, since traditional wheat was replaced in the 1960s by hybrids largely developed by Borlaug. The new wheat had similar toxic content to traditional wheat, in gluten, phytates, and wheat germ agglutinin. But it also had much larger levels (50 times) of certain protease inhibitors, and these affect humans as well, and I am convinced that they are a contributing cause to the rapidly increasing diseases of civilization (through gut inflammation).

The point is that GMO research is used purely to corporate profit's end, and not to improve mankind's condition. Until people have something to say about in which direction(s) should the technology be pushed, we are not going anywhere.

I have nothing against GMOs...i just think they aren't the answer to the bigger problem (overpopulation)---

In this case, i think they'll fail. Just don't see a lot of people worrying about browning apples. Maybe for prepackaged foods? But if McD's won't buy it...they did pass on GMO potatoes and we see where that went.

To me apples taste and look pretty good so I was hoping that when they splice genes that they would be trying to make trees more disease/pest resistance.

Clark, that seems like a bit of a stretch. Not many of us grow apples from seeds or on seedling rootstock and I really can't imagine the holders of the kind of patent you are mentioning investing resources to first identify and then sue a homegrower for growing a tree from accidentally contaminated seed.

If such things kept me up at night my sleep issues would destroy me.

The thing that seems illogical to me about high fear of GM0's beyond patent issues is the idea that a man made mutation is inherently more dangerous than those that occur every second in nature or more dangerous than new organisms that come from normal evolutionary pathways.

I'm thinking about AIDS and Ebola.

Mother nature despises a monopoly- that is the excessive domination of any specific organism, and human beings seem to do a very good job of filling that bill. The planet has become much like a mono-culture of naked apes. Such a ripe target for future pathogens even more aggressive than the above mentioned two.

There's something to keep you up at night.

Harvestman,

Mother nature does hold the rule book and rewrites it as needed. Missouri and Arkansas grows more fruits from seed I think than Kansas but we grow our share. It's more common than you think. If companies genetically modify apples they will move on to pawpaw, blackberries, nuts etc. If it's not broke why fix it? To get an idea of the legal problems it would cause in fruit you need only search google for "gmo lawsuit" and you will find some companies have sued and been sued 100 + times over grains. In college I recall seeing pictures of strawberries growing in the snow and plants with lightning bug dna that allowed them to glow etc. I think in nature problems caused by genetic tampering could be significant. We don't know the long term effects on the body from gmo foods. We do know recombinant dna techniques will continue regardless of my opinion. Most people are unaware bacteria dna are used and not just plant material when making gmo grains.

The other question is why develop this apple, when the Cortland stays white a lot longer than any other apple.

It is one of those controversies where folks have their opinions and those opinions probably won't move as a result of discussion. The only constructive discussion would probably be if someone who hadn't drawn a conclusion was in the room.

I've listened to scientists who do this kind of research discuss it. They are the folks you should probably bring questions and doubts to.

As far as Cortlandt, it may hold its color but it certainly doesn't hold its texture. Seems to stay crisp in the fridge for about 3 weeks.

I’m probably a good example of the type person
that should not be able to experiment with GMO. I love the trial and error
part of fruit growing. Many great thoughts on this subject have been expressed
on this topic and I feel like this is an important decision that may already
have been decided. Regardless of our personal feelings on the matter I don’t
think it will stop. With that in mind we need to monitor what is going on and try to have a good outcome.

I think that there IS a difference if the genetic modification was derived from the same species (do I have the correct nomenclature?) of plants as opposed to bringing in a TOTALLY FOREIGN GENE, (animal, bacterial, viral etc) into the mix. We need to realize that just because it is a plant does not mean that it or one of its genes are universally benign.

The first method is just selective breeding on steroids the other is messing with too much of the unknown, IMO.

Mike

Something to keep in mind is that all domestic crops would not exist if not for us. Many crops would not look like they do, I would say most. Nothing in farming really occurs in nature, how we grow things, how we manipulate land etc. We have already manipulated plant genes. Now we have more tools to bring in any genes. But this too is limited. We can only use genes that exist already. So for me I don't see it as some great mystery or unknown. How the genes work, what they do is known pretty much. We can't really create new biological molecules that have some unknown effect. That may be the next step. Many biological molecules are dangerous, but we know what they are and what they do. I don't see it as messing with the unknown. Zaiger mixing cherries and peaches without GMO technology, but does it really matter? Just because it could occur by itself (but never will), and the fact GMO cannot occur without us, not that big a deal to me. I think we should be cautious, but it doesn't really concern me. All these genes have already been expressed, just not in these new combinations. Again we know what the genes do, no mystery strangeness I can see happening. with this technique.

I guess too it is true we are all related, animals and plants come from the same source. DNA is DNA, it reads the same in animals and plants. Our blood has the same salt content as seawater, because we came from the sea. We are all related, we all came from simple life forms. The reason it works is we are all related. It is not as far out as people make it. Of course it works, we are all cousins. Humans are natural creatures, we also are part of nature and it is natural for humans to gene splice.

"All mammals raise a paw!" - They Might Be Giants

Btw I mentioned my friend with CF. Here is some info on her. I'm really good friends with her dad. I see Julia a few times a year. She is one special person. I would do anything to help her.Julia

If you google her name write ups about her, and her accomplishments are all over the web.

Harvestman,

I take your point about entrenched positions, but I personally am very ambivalent when it comes to GM fruit.

I'm not swayed by the "it's not natural arguments", on the other hand glib2's comments bring up some of my concerns.

The way GM crops have been handled and discussed seem to be poisoning the well against the potentially good things that could be done with the technology.

In the scheme of things, these apples seem relatively innocuous to me, but also a waste of effort. The good news is that for those of us who want to avoid them, these should be pretty easy.

They are only specific varieties and will be more expensive and probably only grown by license and used for pre-packaged processed products. I doubt many of this forum users by pre-sliced ready-to-eat apples as it is. (I suppose the culls could find their way into sauce and juices or other processed foods)

“Greenstar Apple” A new apple that stays naturally white hours after it’s sliced.

The Greenstar was developed from a natural cross between the Delbarestival and Granny Smith varieties and has a sweet flavour.

Greenstar apples also contain a high level of Vitamin C and they also possess the remarkable quality of resistance to oxidation. Because of this, the flesh of a Greenstar apple will stay white after being cut open or bitten into for hours afterwards.

Alcedo. Nice looking apple. Thanks for previous advice on using parafilm fo grafting.

There are a number of good commercial apples that taste better than the varieties they've chosen for these Arctic versions that resist oxidation for a long time after cutting.

Discoveries and inventions in

the field of gene technology or genetic manipulation, respectively, will continue,

for events must unfold --- contrary to the desires of the foes of genetic

manipulation who even now persist in ranting and raving against it. The time is

no longer that remote when, through genetic manipulations, plants and animals

will be successfully cross-bred, and totally new life forms created. Hence, the

stupid, antagonistic gripers will scream in vain; they should be grateful instead

that science has advanced to a point where genetic manipulations become

feasible. For only through genetic manipulations will future rectification of the

terrestrials' genetically-manipulated degeneration be guaranteed, so that they

may be able to again fit into the normal progression of negative and positive.

Creational secrets will, of course, not unravel through this process and will

remain a mystery to Man for the time being, even though he will actively search

for them while on space stations beyond Earth. This does not signify, however,

that science will be inactive; on the contrary. Scientists will unveil the secret of

gravitation. In doing so, they will begin mastering certain facets of space and

mass. But just before this transpires, terrestrials will develop the capability of

allowing human organs to "re-grow" for organ transplants. These organs will

always be adapted to the particular body in need of the organ. As a result, the

danger of organ rejection is eliminated.

Geneticists will eventually...

discover a method that enables plants to produce the animal protein required by

human beings. Scientists will finally realize that this process is actually feasible

through genetic manipulation. This realization is to be expected very soon,

although its enactment will not occur until much later. Blame for this delay can be

placed on the anti-genetic-manipulation gripers who, insanely and

incomprehensibly, are against gene technology and gene manipulation. Antigripers'

efforts must be blamed, therefore, for the burden upon life for long-time mass-breeding,

mass-transports and mass-tortures of billions of animals. The solutions brought about

by vegetable-animal protein production and a perfectly acceptable meat substitute

could have been effected long before through gene technology to be marketed as food

supplies, were it not for the decades of insane anti-griping efforts that impede these

actions. The blame for the suffering of many billions of animals must be directed toward

these idiotic gripers until they are ultimately forced into silence and kept quiet. Only then will the ills of mass animal breeding and all other related tortures for animals find an end.

Source,...

http://theyfly.com/articles/Contact_251.htm

I would point out many improvements are not actual improvements. Open pollinated corn for example is much better quality than hybrid or GMO corn alternatives that came along later. Hybrid and GMO corn only produces more bushels but not better nutrition. Hybrid corn fails to pick up many minerals open pollinated corn picks up such as cobalt. These differences seem minor to the layman but the reality is each mineral has a purpose. Here are a several articles on the subject

http://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(57)94618-0/abstract?cc=y

http://www.equiworld.net/feeding/articles/o/traceminerals.htm

http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/cobalt-for-soil-and-animal-health/

I believe the reason for no browning apples is, they can shake them off of the tree and they won't bruise or turn brown when hitting the ground.

clarkinks, the problems you cite with GMO corn are not with the technology but with the uses that have been chosen for it. If so motivated I'm sure they could have developed GM corn that picks up more cobalt and minerals if that is what they cared about. The same problems show up in traditional breeding. They choose cultivars using criteria us home orchardists wouldn't prioritize.

tim45z10, they've stated that these apples are for pre-sliced packaged ready-to-eat apples.

There are a lot of apple cultivars recently that stay white for a while. I have wondered what gene is responsible. Figure it must have to do with iron uptake by the fruit. I assume the GMO in this case is a knockout gene, which would be far less objectionable to most anti-GMO people than most of the A. tumafaciens vectored gene packages.

The main market for these apples will be the packaged salads sold in fast food joints.

murkwell,

A point well taken of what they should have done or could have done but not what they did with hybrid or gmo corns. GMO corn makes great ethanol fuel but in my opinion is a poor choice for cattle feed. Brucellosis is known to be caused by a lack of cobalt which translates to Undulant fever in humans. The purpose of pasteurization was to eliminate such illness as undulant fever. This is another interesting article http://theemergencyfoodsupply.com/archives/some-thoughts-on-plant-hybridization-genetic-engineering-and-organic-farming.

Here is a history of how pasteurization of milk came to be and many other fascinating pieces of information http://www.minimilkcows.com/rawmilkcomparison.htm

The question that comes to my mind if cobalt eliminates illness such as brucellosis why would it be overlooked? Getting back to apples which like my corn I like fine the way they are why would I grow them? I think I've explained why I feel the way I do and certainly can see why other people would think gmo's may someday lead to some great break through. To my original point I don't see those breakthroughs yet. People should not experiment in the wild with things like gmo's that can negatively impact the food supply because the results are detrimental to the seeds of the future.