Should We Continue to Produce Genetically Modified Foods? Essay

Genetically modified foods (GMFs) are foods that have been deliberately modified in order to create healthier and more beneficial crops for both the farmers and the society. The purpose of this report is to draw a justified conclusion about whether we should continue to produce genetically altered foods, focusing particularly on corn. Both the benefits and issues associated with this transgenic technology will be considered as well as the past, present and future of this specific technology.

Without the utilization of Bt corn it is estimated that between 19.5-41.4% of corn is lost due to pathogens and pests on a global scale. Thus, corn that has been genetically modified is able to withstand pests as well as improve its ability to adapt of the environment. This results in a crop that is hardier and contains more vitamins and minerals which positively contributes to alleviating the issue of world hunger at a lower price. Currently in the United Sates, more than 80% of corn has been modified. The main purpose of Bt corn is that is it designed to produce Bacillus thuringiensis, a bacterium that is deadly when ingested by susceptible insects as well as the corn is resistant to the herbicide glyphosate which has fewer adverse environmental impacts when compared with other herbicides used to control weeds.

In order to create a Bt crop, a gene from a naturally occurring soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is inserted into the cells during the embryo stage. The first step in the process is extracting the desired gene from other organisms through the utilizing of both restriction enzymes which are enzymes that recognize a specific sequence of nucleotide bases on the DNA and cleaves it as well as DNA ligase which are attached at the end of the sequence. Thus, through the process of polymerase chain reaction the desired DNA sequence that makes up the cry 1Ab gene is extracted. The cry 1Ab soil bacterium version of the gene is modified slightly so that a better result is obtained when placed into a corn plant. The DNA that was obtained is then placed into the plasmid of the bacteria which is then replicated to produce more of the DNA. Not only is DNA included by also an antibiotic resistant gene which allows the carrier cell to be amplified successfully through the process of transformation. This process involved the carrier cells being put into two different types of medium, one that has a specific antibiotic while the other does not. It is placed into the first medium where is the growth is significant and then into the second medium where the only the bacteria that has the antibiotic resistant gene is able grow. Therefore, only the bacteria that carries the antibiotic gene can carry the desired DNA. The next step in the process of obtaining Bt corn is designing the gene. For corn, the plant’s nucleotide G-C is replaced with the A-T nucleotide from the Bacillus thuringiensis. The termination sequence as well as a marker gene is also added, the termination sequence tells the cellular machinery when the end of the gene sequence has been reached whereas, the marker genes aid in the identification of plant cells that have the specific integration of the transgene and usually consists of a protein that encodes for resistance against herbicides or specific antibiotics. Step 4 is transformation where the modification is brought upon a cell through induction of new DNA. Lastly, a process called tissue culture is utilized to obtain the whole plant. The corn plant which is able to be transformed does not contain all of the optimal genes which a producer needs in the field. Therefore, the last step in biotechnology, occurs in the field where plant breeders cross this corn plant that contains the cry 1Ab gene with their top performing line to create a high yielding Bt corn variety.

The resulting transgenic corn that obtains the gene in all its cells and expresses the insecticidal protein in its leaves. When the pests ingest the toxin, it fatally damages the lining of the gut due to the formation of pores in the digestive tract allowing naturally occurring enteric bacteria such as Enterobacter as well as E. coli to enter the circulatory system. The bacteria bind to the gut wall resulting in the insect to stop feeding. Thus, within hours, the gut wall breaks down the normal gut bacteria invades the body cavity. The pests die to septicaemia as the bacteria multiplies in the blood. Moreover, as Bt corn produces the insecticide within its tissue, the toxic proteins are protected from the sun and therefore persist longer as well as corn continually produces the toxin over a season which extends its protective effects.

The are many benefits that come with genetically modifying food. Such as there is a higher level of hardiness therefore it is more resilient in difficult growing conditions, such as droughts and is able to withstand an infestation of weeds or plants. Also, a longer shelf life without preservative which allows farmers to sell there produce for longer periods of time as well the produce is able to be exported to other countries. Another main benefit is that vitamins and minerals can easily to added which ensures a well-rounded diet. By increasing the nutritional contents, it will contribute to helping alleviate world hunger. Also, by increasing the amount of yield on existing croplands it will increase the farmer’s profit as well as lowering the price of the food for the customers, improving the economic position of the country. Moreover, by designing the corn to become resistant towards pests, the amount of pesticide used is reduced which would improve both the soil quality as well as the surrounding water quality. Thus, offering both environmental and economic benefits to the farmers. Bt crops are highly effective at combating pests such as European corn borer, rootworm, corn earworm, tobacco budworm, and bollworm.

On the other hand, there are various negative aspects regarding modifying corn such as the higher costs associated with GE seeds are not always offset financially by lower production costs or higher yields. Farmers in area with fewer weeds and pest problems may not have much improvement in terms of reducing crop losses. However, farmers value the greater flexibility in pesticide spraying that GE crops provide and the increase safety for workers from less exposure to harmful pesticides. Another concern is that broad-scale planting of Bt corn will render the toxin ineffective over time. Pests can gradually build resistance to any pesticide, and so the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that 20% of Bt field areas be planted to non-Bt corn to avoid such pressures.

In the past, Bt has been sprayed on fields as an organic pesticide; several major pests of corn that are difficult and expensive to control with chemical insecticides are susceptible to BT. When sprayed on the surface of crops, however, Bt toxins break down quickly when exposed to ultraviolet light as well as they are washed off during strong rain. Thus, it was an expensive and insufficient method. To solve this problem, several varieties of corn have been genetically engineered to incorporate BT genes encoding proteins such as ‘delta-endotoxins’ and ‘vegetative insecticidal proteins’ which are specific to various insect pests.

Thus, it can be concluded through the analysis of both the positive and negative aspects of genetically modified corn, that it is recommended that we continue to produce genetically modified food as the positives outweigh the negatives. Moreover, the negatives can be overcome with future technologies such as gene editing. Therefore, corn should be modified to help improve both health and economy of our society.

Corn: Significant Advances Then and Now

Corn, what is it and how did the genesis of corn begin from a tropical grass native to Mexico called teosinte that dates back more than 80,000 years ago to become maize that we all come to know as corn. When you hear or think about this simple word a few thoughts would pop in your head like popcorn, ethanol, or corn on the cob that you would find on your dinner plate. From multiple sources of information there are arguable facts about the evolution of maize. First, where it was domesticated; one states it originated between Jalisco and Oaxaca, Mexico, and the other states it came from the highland of Mexico. The second arguable fact is the date of when maize first appeared; one source states that it began “sometime between 2,000 and 750 years ago” (Zorich, Zach, pg.12), and another states “it started 7,000 years ago” (Guitar, Lynne, par.2). What can be proven is that corn first starts out from a tropical grass called teosinte in Mexico and through either accidental cross-pollinating or intentional bred, thus beginning of domesticating and the radical process of maize. Corn has changed the lives and lifestyles of people across the continent from its discovery, cultural change, and modern dominance in the products.

The introduction of corn to the Native Indians was like a wildfire. The migration of corn had spread from the tribes in Canada to the tribes in South America, becoming a major corner stone in beliefs, rituals, history, and gardening. The Native Indians would have first roasted the corn on the flat surface of a rock before using a stone bowl and muddle to grind the cooked corn into meal that would be used to make either cakes, breads, porridges, cornmeal, succotash, (a vegetable stew), and tortillas. The Cherokee has been noted to have produce from the corn kernels into what is a puffed vegetable that was termed in 1629 by the colonist hominy and sofkee, a sour corn mixture with a thickness that ranges from drink to porridge. It’s reported that back when the Pawnee existed, hominy that comes from flint corn, was one of their main sources of food, a hard-kernelled variety that is also able to grow in cold, wet climate of the Great Plain. The Hopi tribe was known to have produced twenty varieties of cultivated corn that is symbolic to them.

The Native Indians had built their belief, cultural, and planting system that still stands strong within all surviving nations around corn. The Native Americans would refer to a proven and efficient growing method as the ‘three sisters’, a process of growing corn, beans, and squash in a proven working symbiotic system that supports each other during growth. The corn gives the beans support, while the squash creates a living mulch over the bare soil between the corn hills and the beans supply nitrogen to the corn. Each food item “complements each other” (Tozer, Frank, ‘The Vegetable Growers Handbook’, 2013, p.116). The Zuni tribe believed that corn has miraculous power since they would the dust the doorway with cornmeal to keep them from entering. Another set of tribes would have ceremonies for the planting of the corn and the ‘green corn ritual’, a harvesting celebration that somehow renews new soil for the next planting season the Mahican and Muscogee tribes perform annually.

By about 1492, the Europeans had arrived in the Americas. By around that time the Indians had hundreds of varieties of corn being dent, flint, sweet, and popcorn were flourishing throughout the content becoming the ‘five major groups of corn’ (Guitar, Lynne, par.4). The introduction of corn to other neighboring countries around the world like means of trading made it possible for counties like Iberia, France, Italy, and China. China through the same process of crossbreeding used sweet corn with a grass native to their region to produce a product we all know today and eat in some of our Chinese food dishes: ‘baby corn’ (Tozer, Frank, ‘The Vegetable Growers Handbook’, 2013, p.116), that produces up to 40 ears per corn stalk. Some would refer baby corn as ‘Baby Asian’. Just like the Native Indians, the Europeans were also noted to use every part of the corn. The cob of the corn was turned into smoking pipes, stuffing in their mattresses, and the leaves from the ears of corn were used for as wrappings for a food item called tamale or made into children’s dolls for the girls. Most of their food items that were created around that period were considered to be convenient travel foods. All that still be made today if wanted, like the corn doggers and hush puppies, to name a few.

During the early 1800’s into the late 1800’s, the usefulness for corn made a comeback. Starting in the United States and spreading across the globe. A long-forgotten Native American food, popcorn, was revived as a snack, in amusement park and theater concessions, and a booth at the Columbia Exposition in Chicago. The idea took off without any problems, because it is sold at every sporting event. In the mid 1800’s, farmer Robert Reid created by chance a new hybrid called ‘Reid’s Yellow Dent’ (after the creator), the creation was by chance cross pollination but proved to be beneficial, it was widely cultivated in the Midwest. A vegetarian food faddist by the name of John Harvey Kellogg, in Battle Creek, Michigan, in 1895 developed a cereal called, ‘cornflake’. By 1911, there was 107 brands of cornflakes to choose from. Mills that were used for grinding corn were marketed as ‘corn crackers’, in 1844, and by 1870 they were marketed as, ‘corn poppers’. The total corn growth in the United states alone has more than surpassed the combined growth of wheat, oats, barley, rice, rye, and sorghum. During the Civil War in 1860 the Confederate had mainly relied on corn as their crucial source of food for their soldiers. Corn production was increased from 30 million bushels to 55 million bushels to help bolster the food supply during the war in the feeding of their soldiers, but proved difficult due to rebel armies robbing the farmers of their laborers and emancipation setting the slaves free.

In the late 1800’s, through the mid to late 1900’s, to keep up with feeding a growing population in the United States in the 1920s, the U.S. government started to supply subsides to help the small individual farmers. The subsides increased around the 1930s, during the Great Depression. The Depression was felt by everyone including the farmers, to help offset some financial losses. During the hardship, farms failed or went under due to the collapse, agricultural companies started to absorb the small farms at produce their own by crops, making more profit and still receiving subsidies from the government. Even today the small individual farmers still don’t agree with the government’s handling of that issue. Between 1877 and 1920, horticulturists were able to develop new hybrids of corn that has become standard in the country’s farms, including ‘Golden Chaff’, ‘Shoepeg’, ‘Country Gentleman’, and ‘Golden Bantam’. At the same time while that was go on the United States in an attempt to cure the ills of society enacted the 18th Amendment, prohibition, that started in 1920 and ended in 1933. It was during this period that ingenuity and creativity took place in the South. Corn being the most widely grown next to wheat, cotton, and a few others. In the South the Great Depression hit them the hardest, the idea started by a bunch of small farmers that wanted to make money fast and easily. Through the process of fermentation and collecting the condensed steam as it is cooled you get a clear liquid called ‘corn squeezing’ (moonshine) that can reach a little over 120 proofs. There are three parts to the liquid. The first part is called the Heads, it has a bitter taste and is the first part that gets discarded first. A person can go blind if any it is consumed. The second part is called the Body. That is the desired part of the alcohol, and the last part is called the Tails. It has a tart taste to it, that can be added to the next batch to get more alcohol. In the state of Kentucky at the University of Illinois, in 1950, Dr. J. R. Loughnam, discovered a way to categories sweet corn by its genes into three different groups: normal sugar (Su), sugar enhanced (Se), and super sweet (Sh2). By 1960, Dr. A. M. Rhodes, produced an even sweeter corn called ‘Sugar Enhanced’ or, in seed catalogs, ‘Everlasting Heritage’.

NASCAR Started from the bootlegging of moonshine and the development of the automobile-dependent working class. The drivers will take a vehicle reinforce the frame, strip anything that is heavy, and work on the engine to make it go faster. The reason is to drive as fast as possible while out running the Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) agents. Over time drivers would brag about how their vehicle is faster than the others, ensuing a race between two for bragging rights. It was not until 1947, William H.G., a mechanic and race car driver, turned sports promoter that start by organizing stock car races, he was able to assemble a group of race car driver, mechanics, and speedway owners. He oversaw the proceeding, that organized stock car racing born from an unregulated gathering into a nationally sanctioned competitive series with rules for ‘safety and performance’ (Howell, Mark D., par.4).

During World War II, solders on the battlefield were suffering not just from the injuries sustained in battle, but during recovery. Once an infection set in it was not good for the soldiers. Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin, the first antibiotic, in 1928. Around that time small amounts of antibiotics were first obtained from strains of mold species P. notatum grown in fermentation bottles. Fleming’s penicillin was able to through the process of fermentation using corn steep liquor, a byproduct from ground corn. During the War the need for drugs spurred development of better methods. It was not until 1941, that a group of biologists working in England, including Oxford’s Sir H. W. Florey and E. B. Chain, purified the substance and prove its effectiveness against infectious organisms and its lack of toxicity to humans. The first successful test occurred in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1942.

Today corn accounts for more than 90 percent of the countries corn in the U.S. primarily meant to be for feed grain, planted on more than 80 million acres of land in Midwestern states like Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, South Dakota, Iowa, and parts others became known as the ‘Corn Belt State’. The growth has always depended on climate conditions during the growing season which fluctuates. Currently more than 1/3 of the U.S. crop is used for livestock feed; another 20 percent is exported (Japan buys the most), and 40 percent goes for ‘ethanol production’.

As the U.S. population has grown, agriculture had to adapt to meet the demand for more food. The scientific breakthrough in the use of modifying the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), of existing food product or completely genetically engineering new food has become a more than common item since the 1990’s. Making genetically modified corn, cotton (in the form of cotton seed oil), canola(oil), and soybeans that are “widely present in many foods” (‘Agriculture & Food Supply: Issue Overview’, par.6). Many European nations have banned genetically modified food (GMO), for several reason all being health related and linked to a corn product called ‘high fructose corn syrup’ also relabeled on the back of the ingredient label as one of the three other possible names: ‘glucose-fructose’, ‘isoglucose’, and ‘glucose-fructose’. It is almost impossible to not consume it. It is in your everyday food items like syrup, most breads and cereals, baked goods, and dairy desserts such as ice cream and frozen yogurt. Many popular packaged foods not thought of as sweetened include your salad dressings, stove-top-stuffing, nutrition bars, crackers, cottage cheese, yogurt, macaroni and cheese, baked beans, tomato paste, jarred tomatoes sauce, applesauce, sweet pickles, relish, and the list goes on including fruit juices, sodas, and flavored drinks to just to “name a few” (Culvert, L. Lee, par.14).

The European Union (EU), has gone and taken steps in 2015, limiting how much fructose corn syrup is used annually to 303 thousand tons compared to prior annual use of 18 million tons in foods and beverages (Culvert, L. Lee, par.10). When compared to the United States, fructose intake has steadily increased. When taken in the health reasons, from the medical and nutritional research studies have reported that high fructose corn syrup is a significant cause of heart disease, obesity, cancer, dementia, and tooth decay, even in moderation (Culvert, L. Lee, par.7). Beekeepers have been doing is using diluted high fructose as a nectar substitute for honeybees when blossoms are scarce or absent. Beekeepers would supply a fructose solution that has a higher amount of sugar, fewer nutrients, and contains hydroxymethylfurfural, a chemical that tends to increase heat and is toxic to honeybees when consumed at high concentrations (Culvert, L. Lee, par.2).

Could a possible scenario where something happened to all the corn planted throughout the world? There were two recorded event such. The first was the Famine of 1692; it was noted to be a bloody confrontation between the indigenous group and the Spaniards in Mexico City. The former, desperate from the scarcity of food as well as colonial authorities’ indifference to the tragic situation, had set fire to the viceroy’s palace and took arms with a shout, “Death to the Gachupin’s (Spaniards) who eat our corn”. The Viceroy’s response to the Indian uprising was characterized by firm resolve and brutality and he ordered those who rose up in rebellion on that night to be “publicly hung” (Sarah Bak Geller, par.1). The second recorded event happened on May 3, 1785 to 1787, the inhabitants of New Spain, at the time the people were experiencing a drought, days, weeks, and, months would pass and no rain. All their chief crop, being the corn that was planted became a complete lost due to drought. The people were able to adapt by change a lot of their food recipes with a “substitution item” (Sarah Bak Geller, par.2).

With all the advancements made using corn, whether good or bad. What would happen if something was to happen to one or two stains, and what would the end results be? With the constantly new changes and development in gene splicing and manipulation, a new strain of corn could be invented to closely make up for the loss. Could a virus affect certain varieties of corn? Yes, and no matter the solution would be to destroy the affected plants and start over for seed that was saved as a solution.

Corn as a Staple Food

Maize, also known as corn in the United States, Canada, and Australia is one of the most wildly produced crops in the world. It is almost assured that maize was first domesticated in Mexico and then reached the United States as a cultivated plant (Linton, 1924). Corn is one crop that is the most common in the everyday food we eat. But with a high level of production comes a very difficult level of labor. Labor causes loss of life in many areas around the world along with devastating environmental impacts. This staple crop is a key for almost every country on the globe. It is in almost everything we eat, and a lot of times can be eaten alone. To feed billions of people around the world, corn production has very negative effects on many different aspects. The demand for corn is very high all over the world, but to meet this demand its production takes a toll on the people who produce it, the environment in which it is produced in, and how important it is for the economy.

When the English settlers first came to the new world, they didn’t know what to call this cereal grain. The word ‘maize’ was originally Spanish, and since the English settlers did not know about this grain, they had to name it something. They called it Indian corn, which now it is just known as corn (Stack Exchange, 2009). In the 1900s, research was done and evidence has shown that corn is a hybrid plant “resulting from the interbreeding of cultivated corn and the wild grass teosinte” (Whiting, 1944). Also, evidence shows that a corn-like plant, that was previously domesticated away from the wild grass teosinte, was brought into the area where teosinte was growing, and they interbred with each other to produce the corn we eat today (Whiting, 1944). This event was very unlikely to happen considering that there had to be two very specific types of plants that had to interbreed.

To begin with, as we know, corn is one of the most widely produced crops in the entire world. The United States is the largest producer of corn in the entire world, coming in at over 345 million metric tons in 2019-2020. The United States is the world’s largest exporter of corn as well. The United States is leading in terms of how much they produce by a high margin. Coming in at second is China with 260 million metric tons, and at third is Brazil who produces about 100 million metric tons of corn (Statista, 2020). In the United States, more than 90 million acres of land are planted with corn, and the majority of the crop is grown in the heartland region, which is the central area of the country. Although it may seem that most of the corn we produce is produced to be consumed, it is not.

Corn is processed into many industrial products, which include starch, sweeteners, corn oil, beverages, and even ethanol fuel (USDA, 2020). Most of the corn grown in the United States are grown in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, the eastern areas of South Dakota and Nebraska, and the western portions of Ohio and Kentucky. The corn acreage in the United States has grown significantly from the 1980s to 2010 due to the Federal Agriculture Improvement and Reform Act of 1996. This permitted farmers to make their own decisions when it comes to the production of corn. Famers had an incentive to produce more corn, because they can make their most profitable crop (USDA, 2020). This goes to show that the production of corn is at an ever-increasing rate, and because of the population growth in the world, this level of production will be needed.

In addition, these high levels of corn production come at a cost.

The environmental issues that have occurred because of the huge supply and demand of corn has taken a toll on the environment locally and around the world as a whole. According to a study, it evaluated the potential aggregate and regional agricultural land use and the environmental impact it has had in due to corn ethanol production (Larson, 2010). The US agriculture sector used an intergraded modeling approach to determine the ethanol production in the United States. They found that the production of ethanol production jumped from 1.6 billion gallons a year to 9 billion gallons a year from 2000 to 2008, almost all made from corn starch (Larson, 2010). Since the amount of corn-based ethanol fuel is increasing at a very fast rate, it has grown to become a problem for the environment in which it’s produced.

The land where corn-based ethanol is produced has had problems with soil erosion. The increased production of corn-based ethanol increases the amount of pesticide pollution in the environment. Due to the high level of crop management, on-farm carbon dioxide emissions result from the combustion of fossil fuels are increasing, and off-farm emission emanates from the use of fossil fuels for manufacturing and transportation of inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides, and seeds (Larson, 2010). Emissions from corn crop production have been estimated to be between 103 trillion g of CO2 (113.5 million tons) and 111 trillion g CO2 (122.4 million tons) (Larson, 2010). Many different kinds of machinery used in crop production increases the level of carbon dioxide induced in the soil and the atmosphere. Although the use of fertilizer and chemicals can be changed so that it would be less devastating to the environment, it will continue to have somewhat of a negative impact.

Speaking of fertilizers, to enhance the growth of corn, its producers use a vast amount of nitrogen fertilizers. Although nitrogen is critical for life on Earth, an excess of it can have devastating impacts on the environment and for the lives of humans and animals. The nitrogen in the fertilizers can seep underground into groundwater, and can also runoff into two major bodies of water such as rivers and lakes. Excess exposure to nitrogen can be devastating to ecology. It can and has led to many fishes dying in rivers and lakes nearby. Also, for humans, too much exposure to excess nitrogen can lead to diseases and birth defects. (Garcia, 2017). The demand for corn is increasing every day, as it is a very important commodity to feed the world population. Considering the increase in corn production, this will lead to an even more devastating environmental impact for the United States, as we produce the most corn than any other country.

Farmers who are responsible and grow corn have had and will continue to have negative impacts on their well-being and survival. Farmers constantly live in fear of losing their crops and their hard work not being paid off. One of the many things they have to deal with is soil erosion. Soil erosion leads to loss of fertility for their corn crops. Production of their crops will and can continue, but they will lose a significant amount of money that they have spent trying to grow corn. (Nadal, 2002). Corn farmers often find themselves in difficult positions trying to have a sustainable business, but some factors are just out of their control. For them to stay sustainable in the long run, “farmers have to put additional pressure on their land to counter the negative trends in the yield. This launches a round of increased erosion” (Nadal, 2002). In Mexico, corn producers have to deal with more than just environmental impacts. They have to deal with government policies and laws regarding the production and distribution of corn. In the Southeastern Puebla, Tehuacan Valley, known as the ‘Cradle of Corn’ (Fitting, 2002), indigenous farmers had to overcome and adapt to neoliberal reforms and economic crisis. A huge amount of corn imported from the United States for the use of animal feed, grain for tortilla, and many different industrial needs were found to be genetically modified. This batch of corn was made its way into local markets and small-scale cultivators for planting, but they did not know the kind of purchase they had just made (Fitting, 2002). This finding posed a threat to biological discovery in the valley, where maize is thought to be first discovered. It also triggered an international trade debate about the extent of how corn imports can potentially harm corn biodiversity in Mexico.

To continue, for many that have tried to make a living by taking up corn production in Mexico, it is just not enough to survive sometimes. Young residents in Mexico near the valley were asked if they would take up crop production as they age, many will not because there is just not enough money to be made (Fitting, 2002). The amount of labor is outrages, and money is not just simply not enough to put food on the table. Neoliberal reforms have made lives more difficult than it already was for corn producers in Mexico. The previous government administration was very helpful in terms of self-sufficiency in corn production, but under the new administration and the neoliberal reforms, the goal of self-sufficiency was replaced. The new administration gave consumers access to cheap tortillas and offered lower prices to corn-based foods. Due to this policy change, small-scale corn producers were out of luck and ran out of business. 50 years ago, in a town where corn producers were able to make a living, simply don’t have money for food now. Those towns are now known as ‘low product potential’ zones and an area that is in poverty and need of ‘social welfare assistance’ (Fitting, 2002). People in these towns have been struggling for decades because of changes in government policies.

In addition, corn is a crop that is very important for people’s survival not only in Mexico. At the Mexico-Guatemala border, many residents and corn producers there risk their lives selling corn to each other’s country. Considering the neoliberal policies in their countries, residents there pursued their own way of making a living. Their plan to smuggle corn from Mexico to Guatemala has been a vital strategy not only to make money, but to survive in their hostile environment. They argue that this constituted legitimate ‘free trade’. Residents at the border stress the legitimacy of this ‘free trade’, where corn is vital for their survival. Residents there don’t want to smuggle weapons, drugs, and illegal immigrants, but trading corn should not be considered illegal as those (Galemba, 2012). Since corn has a high demand, the policies put forth by governments makes it harder for people to survive in areas like these.

Corn production has a massive impact on the United States economy. A study done by Sangnyeol Jung, a student from Southwest Minnesota State University, and Peter Y. Wui, a student from the University of Arkansas, shows exactly the amount of impact it has on the US economy. They collected data from the US Department of Commerce and the US Department of Agriculture. They find that the total corn production value was $62.6 billion and the total labor income was $37,460,000. This shows that corn plays a vital role in the health and well-being of the US economy.

Corn production gives a massive boost to rural economies in the United States. Ethanol fuel is one of the factors that gives the rural economies a boost. It is produced in bio-refineries through a process of fermenting and distilling from bio-mass feedstock, which is primarily corn. In 2006, 20 percent of the United States corn production was used for ethanol fuel (Nancy, 2007). Twenty percent is a great deal of corn used to produce this fuel, considering the total amount of corn that is produced by only the United States. During the process of producing ethanol fuel, its production creates byproducts which helps expand total revenues. For example, one byproduct is dried grains used in feed rations for livestock. Another way it expanded its revenue is by selling the excess carbon dioxide created by its production to soft drink producers and many other industries and businesses (Nancy, 2007). This goes to show that there is a lot of profits being made in this industry. These profits lead to a stronger rural economy in which it is produced, but can also create a better work environment for its workers, and the demand can lead to more employment in the United States which helps the overall economy.

As it currently shows, corn production has a positive impact on the rural and national economy, but it may not stay that way for long. Environmental policies put forth by the government can lead to a slow down to corn production, this can lead to unemployment for thousands of workers in the United States. Governmental policies are very beneficial for the environment, but it can reduce the growth of the economy. People in local communities would lose their jobs and their hope of a future with the production of corn-based ethanol (Nancy, 2007). This can lead to people not investing in that community, and it can lead to the town where people get laid off to lose a lot of money, money that the town could use for new roads and buildings.

The production of corn is vital for the lives people live not only in the United States, but around the world. This crop feeds billions of people, but it takes a toll on the environment and the people who produce it. It is a crop that many people consume on a daily basis, and also a crop that helps people survive like in rural areas of Mexico. The production of corn has a detrimental impact on the environment, and the increase of supply and demand of this staple crop will only make it worse for the local communities and producers. The farmers that grow corn will continue to have negative impacts on their health and well-being, as a consequence of trying to survive and make a living. It’s very easy to underestimate the road a package of frozen corn took to find its place in the freezer section of your local supermarket. The environmental impacts along with the brutal labor corn production enforces is something only a person involved with would understand. Although corn production is a great benefit for the global economy along with employment, it can be ones only mean for survival.

Works Cited

  1. Fitting, Elizabeth. December 2, 2002. “Importing Corn, Exporting Labor: The Neo Liberal Regime, GMO’s and the Erosion of Mexican Biodiversity”. Sociology and Social Anthropology 23: 15-26. doi.org/10.1007/s10460-004-5862-y.
  2. Galemba, B. Rebecca. November 2, 2012. “Corn iIs Food, Not Contraband: The Right to Free Trade at the Mexico-Guatemala Border’. Journal of American Ethnological Society 39(4): 716-734. doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1425.2012.01391.x.
  3. Garcia, Valerie. May 15, 2017. “Examining the Impacts of Increased Corn Production on Groundwater Quality Using a Coupled Modeling System”. Science of the Total Environment 586: 16-24. doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.009.
  4. Jung, Sangnyeol and Peter, Y. Wui. 2014. “Economic Role of Corn Production and Marketing System in the Midwest”. Paper presented at an annual meeting for the Agriculture and Applied Economics Association, Minneapolis, Minnesota, July 27-29, 2014.
  5. Larson, James. September, 2010. “Economic and Environmental Impact of Corn Grain Ethanol Industry on the United States Agriculture Sector”. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 65(5): 267-279. doi.org/10.2489/jswc.65.5.267.
  6. Linton, Ralph. July, 1924. “The Significance of Certain Traits in North American Maize Culture”. 26(3): 245-349. doi.org/10.1525/aa.1924.26.3.02a00050.
  7. Nadal, Alejandro. September, 2002. “The Environmental and Social Impacts of Economic Liberalization on Corn Production in Mexico”. Oxfam GB and WWE International.
  8. Novack, Nancy. 2007. “Can Ethanol Power the Rural Economy”. The Main Street Economist 2(1):1-6.
  9. Stack Exchange. 2009. “Why Does Corn Mean Maize in American English”. Accessed September 2020. https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/96522/why-does-corn-mean-maize-in-american-english
  10. Statista. 2020. “Global Corn Production in 2019/2020 by Country”. Accessed September 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/254292/global-corn-production-by-country/
  11. United States Department of Agriculture. 2020. “Feed Grains Sector at a Glance”. Accessed September 29, 2020. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/corn-and-other-feedgrains/feedgrains-sector-at-a-glance/
  12. Whiting, F. Alfred. October, 1944. “The Origin of Corn: An Evaluation of Fact and Theory”. 46(4): 500-515. doi.org/10.1525/aa.1944.46.4.02a00060.

Corn and Its Major Benefits

Corn is a food whose value has been recognized all throughout the globe. Initially found in Mexico, over 9000 years ago, corn has garnered a lot of popularity in the world. As of now, it has surpassed the cultivation of other major grains such as rice and barley. Also called maize, the corn benefits are so prominent and so well known that there are countries whose major method of national income is cultivation an exportation of corn or maize. Best example would be United States of America.

There is a reason why corn has become one of the most prominent consumables in the world. It is because of the fact that it packs such a heavy punch of nutrition. These nutrients are extremely helpful in keeping ourselves healthy to face all the difficulties and obstacles of life. A 100 g serving of corn contains: 360 kJ of energy, 18.7 g of carbohydrates, 1.35 g of fat, 3.27 g of protein, vitamins A, B(6), B(9) and C (enough to fill more than one quarter part of DVI), folic acid, 0.52 mg of iron, 37 mg of magnesium, 270 mg of potassium, ferulic acid, a lot of fiber, various antioxidants, and last but not least, 75 g of water. This is just an extract of all the nutrients and healthy chemicals that can be found in corn. A complete list can be found in the United States Department of Agriculture’s food databases. Even with the above list alone, it is possible to assume how much of nutrient bomb corn is. These nutrients, compound with others and in themselves, make corn benefits in abundance.

As said earlier, these nutrients amount to a lot of health benefits. Firstly, corn helps in weight loss. Corn, in one regard, is vastly different from other grains. It has a significantly low accounts of carbohydrates in comparison to the likes of rice. Therefore, it is clear that corn is a great substituent for rice in order to lose one’s weight. Corn is brimming with a lot of fibers. These fibers play a significant role in weight loss. It does so by helping the digestive system and ultimately loss of weight.

Cataracts, alongside macular degeneration, can be considered as two of the most frequent causes of visual impairments in the world. While infections and aging are the main reasons behind these, the nutrition of the body can play a major role too. Daily intakes of antioxidants like carotenoids, zeaxanthin, as well as lutein are suggested. These antioxidants are extremely effective against those said visual impairments. But these antioxidants are abundant in corn. That is why corn is suggested for people with risks of getting these eye disorders.

Corn is filled with vitamin C and the antioxidant called lycopene. These help to increase levels in which collagen is produced. Collagen fend off free radicals from damaging the skin. Besides being used as a consumable, there are other by products of corn such as corn oil and corn starch. These can be directly applicable upon the skin.

Corn can directly influence a lot of functionalities related to blood flow and pressure. Corn can augment the blood flow, decrease the absorption of cholesterol as well as regulate insulin. Regulations of insulin invariably means regulation of blood sugar as well.

Corn has a large account of acids such as folic, zeaxanthin as well as pathogenic. These acids can influence to decrease the risk of a newborn having birth effects. Especially those can prevent the baby from defects such as muscular degeneration, as well as certain psychological problems. Furthermore, the high density of fibers in corn can safeguard pregnant ladies from constipation. Constipation is a common trifle pregnant women have to go through.

Summing up, it is clear that corn or maize is one of the most gifted foods that is around us. This paper consists of only the major benefits of corn. There are so many other minor benefits to this food as well. It is really important that the public is more exposed to these kinds of food and their advantages.

Global Food Production in Corn

Global food production is a key component of global well-being and growth that is steadily adapting to provide for new demands. Corn is one of the world’s most valued grains, based on its immense production volume – with 1,011,068,000 metric tons being produced this year. Ideally, corn is grown in a climate that provides warm temperatures and rich soil, both of which are commonly found in the grassland biome, which is very present in the crop’s leading producer, the United States – followed by China and Brazil. Given the world’s ever-growing population and corn’s importance in the food industry, improving corn production could increase global food production and security.

Genetic Modification

Genetic modification is a long-standing process that has affected the world’s produce and is also a viable option to increase the global food production of corn. By inserting a gene into an organism, genetic modification alters the organism into exhibiting desirable characteristics. By doing this, the grassland biome’s inhabitants and environment can be affected through the unnatural change. Weeds have been proven to mimic and adversely affect the plants that they infest, as when weeds grow with corn, they grow bigger and longer than usual, to the detriment of corn. Other dangers to plants such as corn include pests, diseases and droughts, all of which plants can now be genetically modified to be more resistant to, therefore bettering the plant’s condition – which will increase production. By making crops easier to grow, costs for the consumer will also drop, therefore making food more accessible. Although there are many positives to this strategy, there are negative issues surrounding genetically modified organisms (GMOs). These issues include: the fear that GMOs are not safe for human consumption, that introducing new strains of organisms could adversely affect the environment, or that GMOs may not be cost-efficient. Overall, genetically modifying plants, like corn, can improve quality and quantity of the organism, which in turn can increase global food production.

Crop Rotation

Using corn in a crop rotation is another strategy that could be used to increase global food production. Crop rotation is the process of growing different types of crops in the same area, rotating the plants every season. Planting the same crop in the same area continuously tires out the soil, stripping it of its nutrients and making it more difficult to successfully grow crops. With crop rotation, the soil stays fertile, due to different crops needing different nutrients, which therefore increases the standard of the crop and the amount of it that grows. Pest problems are another issue that can be resolved, as rotating crops will lessen the chance of pests becoming accustomed to the plant and reaching uncontrollable levels. All of this also increases yields, due to the plant growing in healthy conditions. For example, rotating corn with soybeans increases yields and lowers greenhouse gases emissions compared to planting these crops alone. There are some disadvantages of this strategy, including: lack of specialism in one type of crop, the skill and knowledge it requires and cost of proper machinery. In the end, crop rotation has many benefits that can increase corn yields, which therefore can increase global production.

No Till Farming

No till farming is a strategy that corn farmers use to maximize yields, and could result in the increase of global food production. Soil tilling is a substantial reason for soil degradation, so through sustaining the grassland biome, in no till farming, seeds are planting directly into untilled soil, which still contains past crops’ remains. This method relates to increasing global food production in many ways. The soil remains healthy and sustained, which means that farms can live on for longer, consistently providing produce for consumers. Less soil moisture is lost through no till farming, as plant residue is left behind, which helps hold the moisture in the soil and protect against evaporation – all of which improves quality and success of the plant. Using no till farming with corn is increasing in popularity with farmers, as these practices produce higher yields compared to others. There are negatives surrounding this strategy, like: initial costs of machinery, risk of fungal disease due to the increased moisture in the soil and the use of more herbicides to combat weed disruption. Overall, no till corn farming reaps many benefits that can result in an increase in global food production.

Conclusion

In conclusion, an increase in global food production – specifically in staple foods like corn – is necessary due to our evolving and growing world. There are many strategies that could help with this, including: genetically modified organisms, crop rotation and no till farming. Corn is the most produced grain in the world, so it is vital that useful strategies are put in place to sustain its growth and feed the world.

The Social History of Corn in Africa

Anything that can be bought and sold is going to have a complicated story behind its existence, and certain commodities filled formative roles in important historical events. For instance, cash crops such as tobacco and cotton were a source of vast wealth for American plantation owners, produced by back-breaking labor under the barbaric conditions of the institution of chattel slavery. These crops and the products derived from them (and by extension, slavery) were what drove the economy and propelled America into a position of global power. Similarly, corn has an underappreciated but substantial stake in African history.

Due to its sheer utility as a dietary staple, the spread of maize cultivation to Africa’s west coast played a vital historical role both globally and locally. On top of altering the culinary landscape and population capacity of an entire continent, its use as a dietary staple provided vital fuel for the slave trade and potentially had a part in exacerbating its death toll. The historical reasons for maize’s agricultural presence in Africa can be likely attributed to European colonial interests. Some scholars hypothesize that it was initially introduced by the Portuguese. According to anthropologist Arturo Warman, “The linguistic trail, decidedly elusive, confirms such a scenario. Corn is still known as European grain or, more precisely, as Portuguese grain in several different languages spoken along the African coast” (Warman, 61). While it was originally endemic to and cultivated in ancient Mesoamerica, corn is thought to be introduced to Africa’s Atlantic coastal regions and the Cape Verde islands as recently as the sixteenth century CE. According to the writings of an anonymous pilot from Portugal, corn had already become “the chief food of the people” (McCann, 250) a few short decades following its initial arrival. Obviously, the perspective of a Portuguese sailor may not be strictly accurate to the actual material conditions of day-to-day life in historical West Africa, but this source provides some key context for understanding the rapid pace at which the crop became a continent-wide staple. Since then, its consumption has increased drastically, to the point that “in southern Africa, maize has become by far the most important staple food, accounting for over 50% of calories in local diets; in Malawi alone, maize occupies 90% of cultivated land and 54% of Malawians’ total calories” (McCann, 246). The sailor’s account makes sense when compared with contemporary corn consumption statistics.

The enduring popularity of maize can be ascribed to a few factors, not the least of which is its high density of carbohydrates, making it a filling food. More important than that, though, is the relative ease of mass-cultivation; an average corn crop will yield “more food per unit of land and labor than any other [grain]” (McCann, 249). Also noteworthy is its short growth cycle (Warman, 64), which means these larger yields can be harvested more frequently than other grains. Warman also notes that when compared to rice, corn also required fewer “technological transformations [than] rice demanded” (Warman, 64) and was more readily adaptable to the already-ubiquitous slash-and-burn agricultural customs present in Tropical Africa (Warman, 64). These factors explain the historical rise in maize cultivation across the continent. However, this widespread consumption is not without drawbacks.

Even though corn is an abundant source of carbohydrates, it lacks in nutritional content, being “low in useable protein, especially the vital amino acids lysine and tryptophan; its leucine content blocks absorption of niacin” (McCann, 249). Deficits of these nutrients can lead to a potentially lethal condition known as pellagra, the spread of which has been correlated with the increase in cultivation of corn and the dwindling presence of native staples it displaced in some regions of Africa (McCann, 264). These data demonstrate that while maize is a versatile and useful crop, a diet consisting of corn and corn alone is unsustainable in the long term. But this did not matter to those involved in the extremely profitable business of human trafficking in the Atlantic Slave Trade.

Warman makes the observation that corn was a vital asset to slavers, highlighting the sheer tonnage of it that was loaded onto the ships that ferried slaves across the Atlantic. Readily available data confirm that corn was the principal food used in the slave trade. Each slave ship needed a minimum of more than thirteen tons of corn for the transatlantic leg of the voyage, supposing a normal duration of forty-five days and an average cargo of 250 slaves with a daily ration of just over two pounds of corn per person (Warman, 63). This is an immense volume of corn, and the location of corn plantations along the west coast, where human cargo also happened to be exported from, was surely no coincidence. The cheap cost of procuring large amounts of corn, combined with the ready availability of it in these coastal regions made it the ideal crop to use as rations for human cargo. Warman goes on to iterate that the holds the slaves were kept in were described as tombs; the people being transported in these ships were subject to abject and unconscionable conditions, with in-transit fatalities being extremely common due to overcrowding in unhygienic spaces (Warman, 63). Their prescribed diet of corn was almost certainly a factor in the in-transit death toll. It’s easy to infer that the low-nutrition, corn-only diet, which would only occasionally supplemented with other low-cost foods such as beans, only contributed to these fatality rates; however, it likely wasn’t pellagra specifically in these cases, since pellagra generally takes a few years to develop. Instead, the low nutritional content of their rations can be understood as having a more immediate effect: a low-protein diet can lead to a weakened, compromised immune response and muscle atrophy, which combined with the cramped, unsanitary, and overcrowded conditions of a merchant vessel’s cargo hold would effectively turn these slavers’ ships into floating charnel houses. The corn essentially served as inexpensive feed for expendable merchandise; the bottom line took priority over safety, so corn’s lack of meaningful sustenance did not matter because it was cheap. Only most of the captives had to survive the journey for a profit to be made, and corn enabled that inhumane process to be completed at a discount.

The reasons for the spread of corn farming are complex, but in the case of Africa they can in no small part be attributed to calculations made in the interest of colonial expansion and empire. This is to say that West African corn plantations were a critical piece of the infrastructure that enabled the triangle trade, and the human rights abuses that followed. Outside of these systems of abuse, corn itself remains an important, even necessary, crop in many parts of the world; to this day it serves a crucial function as a staple crop not only in Africa, but across the globe, supporting large swathes of the population with inexpensive and filling carbohydrates. Corn serves as a case study in how seemingly simple, everyday things can exist within complicated historical context and problematic social structures.

The Omnivore’s Dilemma: Corn Production

Introduction

In the hunters and gatherers settings, men set out with shotgun and head to the forest to search for wild fruits and animals for food. Women, on the other hand, gather fruits and vegetables from nearby bushes in order to make food readily available. These tendencies coupled with relatively lower population and little competition for resource ensured harmonious living amongst human fraternity. Ripe potatoes, carrots, and green lettuce existed in large quantities in most backyards, especially in the summer. In the winter seasons, on the other hand, fruits and vegetables remained readily available. The green produce subsidized the already flourishing meat and protein sections from the wild game. All these ensured that the human fraternity enjoyed abundance in alternative nutrition, hence providing assurance of good health and longer lifespan.

However, industrial revolution transformed the food production systems and greatly changed the eating habits. The revolution transformed both the physical and mental food production and consumption landscape. As Pollan explains, majority of the current population do not hunt.1 Gathering only exists in a few communities across the world as more people resort to modern modes of eating.

These coupled with the rapidly rising population against the rapidly reducing levels of the natural environment, pizza and other fast food products continue to gain ground in the current markets. Scarcity of land forces human settlements into areas that remain forested with vast natural and game products. Encroachment into the forestland for human settlement reduces the quantity of land available for backyard cultivation. All these translate to skewed eating habits evident in most populations across the globe.

The struggle for the limited resources amid growing population created a capitalistic system in the management of natural resources. Several authorities developed systems for management of the natural resources and control of the economy. Even though capitalism aimed at controlling resources and ensuring proper management for societal success, it fails to create proper measures for return to the liberal hunters and gatherers lifestyles that guaranteed healthy food in abundances. Similarly, skewed systems of resource mobilization and wealth control leads to the state of ‘man eat man society.’ Resources such as corn, which previously acted as basic carbohydrates to the human fraternity, get diversion towards fuel production to run machines. This coming in the wake of insufficient land for cultivation creates a system in which humans turn to omnivorous status and bio-fuels to run engines.

Literature Review

In the book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma, Pollan draws vivid explanations through a series of four piece meals. In this setting, there exists a series of industrial foods originating from the fast manufacturers such as McDonald’s, and industrial organic foods comprising of meals prepared from stuffs bought from Whole Foods outlets. Pastoral components of these explanations come from sustainable farms as depicted in the Virginia farm while personal meals comprise of foods hunted and gathered. Even though the four items leave readers perplexed, the most outstanding derivation comes from the comparison that Pollan makes between industrial foods and farm foods. In the Virginia farm, there seems to be a relatively sustainable natural ecosystem from which Joel Salatin derived livelihood. The farm is devoid of synthetic fertilizers, wastage absence, and everything seems self-sustaining.2

In this ecosystem, the struggle for environmental sustainability remains evident, with issues of global warming and climate change taking center stage. The resources remain limited even as the human fraternity seeks to maximize outputs within the scarce land available.3 The resulting situation necessitates poor public health, abuse of natural resources, relatively lower than a human’s lifespan. It is in these systems of insufficiencies and several negative consequences that necessitate capitalist greed – often coupled with human arrogance, and complacency in policy implementation.

These skewed systems in the most population compel countries to encourage farmers to engage in the production of corn that directly generates benefits to several corporate bodies. In his argument, Pollan explains that the struggle for production of unlimited corn benefits the petrochemical companies, which manufactures fertilizers and pesticides for the crop’s farms, feedlot operators who use corn as animal feeds, industrial buyers of feedlot meat, as well as pharmaceutical companies that develop drugs necessary for development of grain tolerance in animals. Similarly, corn processors, especially ADM and Cargill, rely on corn as an input for the production of vitamins, nutritional supplements, and food preservatives. At the end of chain, there are the large industrial giants that use outputs from corn processors to develop soft drinks, frozen dinners, and snack foods.4

Discussion and Analysis of Issues

Corn and its effects

As discussed above, the entire human diet revolves around corn. If one takes the old age adage of “you are what you eat” into perspective, it is understood that the entire human life in the book remains corn. Even though this sounds awkward, numerous scientific researches show that carbon compounds take the largest share of human body mass. Several scientific studies show that there exists a cycle of carbon elements within the atmosphere often stored in human and plants. Even though the plants take it in the form of carbon dioxide gas that is necessary for photosynthesis, most human foods come from plants.5 Similarly, animal products that human beings feed on derive their basic foods from the plants. This cycle presents the human fraternity as the long-lasting stores of carbon.

Corn origin and conquest

Corn gained entry into the US during the Great Depression. Government policies developed during this time encouraged farmers to produce more food for the American population, as well rescue farmers from the dire consequences of excessive outputs during the depression. Similarly, excessive production of corn presented subsidies for foreign exchange. Amid these excessive productions, the United States’ Federal Government came in with policies that ensured that corn prices remained competitive in the global market. In this context, many farmers resorted to cultivation of corn due to the readily available government market.6

Staller goes further to explain that as the systems to keep high production at relatively lower prices gained ground, the quantity of corn rapidly became excess. Due to the excess production, demand for value addition of the “mountain of cheap corn” sets in; the desire to convert the cheap corn into high priced products gained ground in the economy.7 It was necessary to find people and animals to consume the increasing corn quantity, as well as develop other products that could reduce wastage of corn. It is for this reason that several ranches turned into in-feed programs for the farm animals to consume the relatively cheap corn. Further studies on the trends of such development showed that cows raised in free grazing lands took longer to reach slaughterhouse weight in comparison to those raised on richer diets. Such richer diets comprised large corn quantities, protein, fat supplements, and an array of new drugs to counteract any animal illness.

Importance of corn

Economic Driver

In the works of National Corn Growers Association, there exist more than 4,200 uses of corn. This wide-range usage presents corn as a serious driver of the different tenets of the US economy. In 2013, out of the $53.6 billion agricultural export earnings, corn contributed $4.5 billion. This represented 47.7 million metric tons of export. Such a contribution to the US budget shows how important the corn industry remains to the Americans.

Environmental Safety

Each year, the US produces more than 50 billion pounds of non-biodegradable plastics. Petroleum products are the main sources of input used in the production of such plastic. Therefore, the production process leads to environmental degradation, climate change, and global warming. However, with development of plastics from corn, environmental protection increases. Corn plastics are biodegradable under controlled composites, and are helpful in the manufacture of organic manure. Cornstarch packing for peanuts is an example of biodegradable corn product. This product dissolves in water completely, thus making it an eco-friendly product. Similarly, the use of ethanol in place of gasoline results in the reduction of carbon emissions into the atmosphere. This reduction, estimated at 29 percent, represent withdrawal of 2.7 million gasoline cars in the consumption of 10.6 billion gallons of ethanol.8 Reducing carbon emissions translates to ozone layer protection, thus reducing global warming. The multiplier effect of these phenomena ensures environmental safety and sustainability.

Corn as Livestock Feed

In the US, corn acts as the most reliable animal feed. It is significant to note that the manufacturers of the animal feed offer the largest market base for the corn producers. Given that grazing lands continue to decrease at a tremendous rate, farmers maximize their animal produce using corn-related feeds. The rate of maturity of the corn-fed animal remains relatively higher than the rate of maturity of the freelance animals.9 The above factors shows how best corn and it products contributes to economic development of different nations. However, if the human intake of corn and its products go unchecked, several negative impacts arise.

Negative impacts of corn consumption

Even though many people enjoy corn-related meals, the health related risks that come with such consumptions are dangerous. Given that the corn-related health problems takes time to mature in human body, many people assume these defects even though they offer the underlying reason for major health defects in the current human population. Most human beings derive primary proteins from farm animals like cows, sheep, and goats. In the past, grass worked as the major source of food for these farm animals. However, with increasing population and scarcity of land for grazing due to the rising human settlement needs, the ability to keep such farm animals in a free grazing land setting remains in jeopardy.10

Given the rising modern economic trends, most farmers raise cattle, goats, and sheep on corn due to inadequate grazing lands. Since the digestive systems of these animals cannot take up large quantities of corn, the strain in digestion weakens their systems due to the insufficient take up of typical meals. As more intake of corn takes place, strains of E. coli gains grounds in the digestive tracts of animals. This easily passes to humans who consume such animals. Insufficient digestion of corn within the animals’ digestive systems may lead to increased uptake of raw corn, especially in an animal diet made in a hurry.

Research shows that corn-fed meats have low nutrient levels in comparison to natural grass-fed meats. The omega-6 and omega-3 inflammatory fatty acids in corn are responsible for chronic inflammation disorders that often cause heart problems and degeneration of human health conditions. Corn cereals, corn chips, and corn syrups represent some of the most dangerous products of corn. Humans also take up much corn oil via several corn products. For example, corn syrup used as sweetener in soft drinks exposes humans to obesity than table sugar. High fructose corn syrup alters the blood sugar levels, thus causing kidney problems and high blood pressure.

Apart from obesity and blood sugar problems, research shows that corn syrup causes premature aging, heart problems, and oxidative damages that may cause cancer.11 Excessive consumption of corn products leads to excessive weight gain. In a study at the Princeton University, laboratory test showed that intake of high fructose corn syrup led to more weight addition in relation to the intake of table sugar. The research showed that people who were susceptible to excessive intake of corn product experienced significant increase in body fats deposits around their abdomens. Increase in weight and excessive fat deposits in the body form the best recipe for obesity, heart failures, high blood pressure, and other lifestyle diseases.

Similarly, excessive corn product intake causes amylophagia. This is a conditional disorder among pregnant women with excessive cornstarch consumption. In many cases, amylophagia results in premature deliveries, C-section deliveries, and high birth weight deliveries. In order to avoid these diseases, regulated intake of corn and corn products is necessary.

In the US, at least forty percent of the country’s corn acts as inputs in the production of bio-fuels. This represents one-sixth of the world’s corn supply. The resultant effects of such statistics show that cars continue to take up human food. With rising needs to ensure environmental sustainability, federal governments continue to provide subsidies to companies that use corn ethanol as their fuel. Despite the fact that it takes relatively less energy to produce corn fuel, this process amounts to cyclic destruction of food supplies often in place to regulate market prices. Such anomaly results in skewed market conditions in which farmers are unable to sell their produce at substantive profits. Capitalism in the corn sector slowly results into destruction of local agriculture. In as much as corn production in the US dominated the foreign market, the farmers have little influence on the prices. The surplus production export fails to earn any extra benefit for farmers.12

Conclusion and Recommendation

Market liberalization and capitalism offer the most viable systems for trade. In this system, the laws of demand and supply help to define market prices of goods and services. In the corn industry, however, market regulation through subsidies confined the ability of market to define prices. The government policies on the purchases of corn produced ensured that prices of corn remained relatively stable even in cases of surplus production. Similarly, in the capitalistic setting, the struggling to control resources for the rising population compromised the availability of grazing land for livestock. This scenario compelled farmers into feedlot agriculture in which farm animals depended on corn products for food.

Since the digestive systems of farm animals always fail to digest the corn product, health issue arise from the consumption of the corn-fed animals. Obesity, high blood pressure, heart problems, kidney failures, stroke, and other lifestyle diseases set in among the human consumers of corn-fed animals. This further implies that capitalism in corn production fails to save the human population from the problems of sustainability, but offers short-term solutions to foot scarcity while exposing individual consumers of corn to chronic health problems. To prevent the health problems, there ought to be strict guidelines to control overreliance on corn.

Bibliography

Chevat, Richie, and Michael Pollan. The omnivore’s dilemma: the secrets behind what you eat. New York: Dial Books Publishers, 2009. Web.

Fabiosa, Jacinto. Land allocation effects of the global ethanol surge: predictions from the international FAPRI model. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, 2009. Web.

Field, Barry. Natural resource economics: an introduction. 2nd ed. Boston, Mass.: Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 2001. Web.

Markowitz, Lisa Beth. U.S. food policy: anthropology and advocacy in the public interest. London: Routledge, 2012. Web.

Pollan, Michael. The omnivore’s dilemma: a natural history of four meals. New York: Penguin Press, 2006. Web.

Preedy, Victor R.. Flour and breads and their fortification in health and disease prevention. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press, 2011. Web.

Smil, Vaclav, and Paul Nachman. Energy analysis and agriculture: an application to U.S. corn production. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1983. Web.

Staller, John, Robert Tykot, and Bruce Benz. Histories of maize: multidisciplinary approaches to the prehistory, linguistics, biogeography, domestication, and evolution of maize. Burlington, Mass.: Elsevier Academic Press, 2006. Web.

Footnotes

1 Michael Pollan. The omnivore’s dilemma: a natural history of four meals. New York: Penguin Press, 2006. Web.

2 Ibid, 403

3 Vaclav Smil, and Paul Nachman. Energy analysis and agriculture: an application to U.S. corn production. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1983. Web.

4 Richie Chevat, and Michael Pollan. The omnivore’s dilemma: the secrets behind what you eat. Young readers ed. New York: Dial Books, 2009. Web.

5 Barry Field. Natural resource economics: an introduction. 2nd ed. Boston, Mass.: Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 2001. Web.

6 John Staller, Robert Tykot, and Bruce Benz. Histories of maize: multidisciplinary approaches to the prehistory, linguistics, biogeography, domestication, and evolution of maize. Burlington, Mass.: Elsevier Academic Press, 2006. Web.

7 Ibid, 279

8 Jacinto Fabiosa. Land allocation effects of the global ethanol surge: predictions from the international FAPRI model. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development, 2009. Web.

9 Lisa Beth Markowitz. U.S. food policy: anthropology and advocacy in the public interest. London: Routledge, 2012. Web.

10 Victor Preedy. Flour and breads and their fortification in health and disease prevention. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press, 2011. Web.

11 Ibid, 259

12 Ibid, 385

“2019 Corn Harvest: Will It Ever End?” by Kennedy

Article Summary

The author of this article describes the corn harvesting campaign of 2019 in the United States and the substantial issues that occurred during this campaign in particular areas of the country. At the beginning of 2020, South Dakota has reportedly harvested 90% of its corn crop, while North Dakota has had only 48% of harvest complete (Kennedy, 2020). The major reasons for the late harvest include inappropriate weather during the year that negatively affected the quality and test weights of the crop and propane shortages that left farmers and elevators “unable to dry corn” (Kennedy, 2020, para. 2). According to the representatives of agricultural companies of North Dakota, due to recent snowstorms and the corn’s high moisture and immaturity, almost half of the crop will be “left in the field until spring” (Kennedy, 2020, para. 4). At the same time, the farmers of South Dakota reported that despite wet soil conditions due to snowstorms, they were generally satisfied with the test weights of the crop and would continue to harvest it.

Economic Concept

The article refers to the effect of domino in economics when one action or event inevitably influences related subjects. The late harvest of 2019 caused the risk of the crop’s loss both in fields and elevators and a lack of fertilizer application. In addition, poor weather events of 2019 that have already been predicted for the future may force the farmers of the Upper Midwest to stop farming in these areas (Kennedy, 2020). Lenders will experience certain incommodities related to the late harvest as well.

Opinion

First of all, information concerning the current corn harvesting campaign was new and highly interesting. From a personal perspective, the effect of domino frequently appears in all spheres of economics and agriculture is not an exception. However, if harvest directly depends on weather conditions, more appropriate weather in the future will contribute to the timely ending of the harvesting campaign.

Reference

Kennedy, M. (2020). 2019 corn harvest: Will it ever end? Progressive Farmer. Web.

Corn Kernel Color Genetics

Abstract

The report provides a study done for the trait of corn color for a monohybrid cross of two breeds of corn plants. The results were analyzed to find the distribution of Chi square and the degrees of freedom were also verified.

Introduction

The breeding corn plant had Alleles that had dominant blue color of the corn. The recessive color of the corns was yellow. The paper has examined the distribution of the dominant and recessive color of the corns.

Method

A monohybrid cross is done by breeding two parents that each breed true for different forms of a single trait. The trait investigated in this lab is corn kernel color. The two forms of kernel color studied here are Blue and Yellow. Corn is a good organism for this type of analysis since each grain (i.e., kernel) represents an independent offspring and lots of kernels are easily observed. We start with a plant homozygous for blue kernels and cross it with a plant homozygous for yellow kernels. The offspring that result from this cross are called hybrids and are the F1 generation. When two individuals from the F1 generation are crossed, the offspring is called the F2 generation. F1 kernels are all blue, while F2 kernels show some blue and some yellow kernels. By inspecting the progeny from the crosses, two hypotheses appear to be true. Sample size was 68 and three sets of observations were made.

Results and Calculation

The results were tabulated as shown in the following table.

F1 F2 F3
Blue Yellow Blue Yellow Blue Yellow
Observed (o) 55 13 47 21 56 12
Expected (e) 51 17 51 17 51 17
(o – e) 4 -4 4 4 5 -5
[subtract e from o in each column]
(o – e)2 16 16 16 16 25 25
[square the value in the column above this one]
o – e)2/e 0.313725 0.941176 0.313725 0.941176 0.490196 1.470588
[divide the value in the column above this one above by e]
Χ2 = Σ of all (o – e)2/e, that is,…. 1.254901961 1.254901961 1.960784314
Blue (o – e)2/e + Yellow (o – e)2/e
[add the (o – e)2/e value for Blue to the (o – e)2/e value for Yellow].
This is your Chi Square value.
  1. Was your chi square value greater or less than that of a probability of (0.05) with 1 degree of freedom? Greater than
    1. Greater than.
    2. Less than.
  2. Do you accept or reject the null hypothesis? ACCEPT
    1. Accept.
    2. Reject.
  3. How confident are you that the trait for yellow/blue kernel color is controlled by a single pair of alleles? 95% sure
    1. 95% sure.
    2. 0.05% sure.
    3. 10% sure.
    4. No way, I rejected the null hypothesis.

Conclusion

The research shows that the null hypothesis theory holds true. The dominant Allele is Blue and the recessive is Yellow. The probability of ¾ ratio holds true and any variations are due to random causes.

References

Mitchell Lawrence G., Campbell Neil A. (2007). Biology: Concepts & Connections with Student CD-ROM, 5th Edition. Publisher: Benjamin Cummings.

Corn Plant’s Developmental Stages

Introduction

Corn develops in several complex stages, which can vary based on the needed maturity period. The development stages are divided into five phases. The first stage is germination, the second one is vegetative growth, and flowering is the third. Fruiting and death are the fourth and fifth stages respectively. The five broad stages of corn development will be discussed in this paper.

Stages of Development

Stage 1: Germination

Immediately after a corn seed is planted, different metabolic reactions start to take place. With the right conditions, which include soil temperatures between 50 and 65 degrees Fahrenheit and adequate moisture, a radicle will protrude and elongate from the seed (Odell’s World, n.d.). A radicle is a rootlet that sprouts from a corn seed as part of the growth process (Wright, 2017). The emergence of the radicle is known as germination, and it can take up to 3 days after planting.

However, the germination period can be delayed depending on different factors, such as soil temperature, moisture, the residue at the top of the soil, and the depth of planting (Wijewardana, Henry, Hock, & Reddy, 2016). The radicle grows downwards whereby many side branch roots occur. Another leaf, known as the embryo leaf, emerges from the seed and grows upwards before penetrating the soil surface. Upon exposure to sunlight, this leaf unrolls and becomes green in color.

Stage 2: Vegetative Growth

After the emergence from the ground, the corn plant continues to grow and elongate over the next weeks to form a stalk (also known as a stem). At the same time, growth also takes place under the soil whereby the root system continues to grow and penetrate the soil to create anchorage for the elongating stalk above the ground. After six weeks, the roots system is fully developed to supply the plant with water and minerals. Above the ground, the first leaf emerges after 4 days while a second one forms within 10 days (Wright, 2017). Between 10 to 20 days, the leaves can carry out photosynthesis, thus providing food for the plant.

Photosynthesis is the process through which leaves trap sunlight in their chlorophyll to make food. After the emergence of the fifth leaf, ear shoots start developing. The stalk continues to elongate and by the time ten leaves are formed, the tassel emerges and grows quickly. At the same time, cobs start forming at the base of the leaves. With time, the cobs reveal silky hairs from their tops.

Stage 3: Flowering

The tassel (a branched structure containing male flowers) forms at the apex of corn stalks (Sharpe, 2017). Tassels emerge three days before the formation of silks at the top of the cobs. The silky heads of the cobs are the female part of the corn plant. After ripening, pollen grains in tassels are shed onto the silky hairs of the cob for fertilization. In the late evening or early morning hours, wind shakes the tassels thus releasing pollen grains, which land on the silky hairs of the cob (Wright, 2017). Pollination continues for approximately two weeks. At this stage, each silky hair is expected to come into contact with at least one pollen grain for pollination and the subsequent development of the kernel.

Stage 4: Fruiting

Fertilization occurs within one day after pollen grains land on the silky hairs. This process leads to the formation of young kernels, which are known as blisters (Sharpe, 2017). Within each kernel, a plant embryo develops. In about 20 days after pollination, the milking process starts (Sharpe, 2017).

During this process, the embryo together with its kernel swells before turning yellow or white in color due to the accumulation of starch. In the next 7 days, the kernel reaches the doughty stage by entering its full size with enough moisture and starch content (Sharpe, 2017). Afterward, the kernels start to dry and ripen. On the outside, the silky hairs begin to dry and turn brown in color. At this stage, the tassel has already turned brown and it dries out. At the same time, the development of leaves also stops. This stage marks the maturity of the corn, and it takes around 60 days from the planting date.

Stage 5: Death

After the kernels in the cob mature, they start to dry followed by the degradation of the entire plant. If not harvested, the corn husks dry completely and they may fall away and release seeds to the ground for the lifecycle to start again.

Conclusion

The lifecycle of corn is a complex process that takes approximately 2 months. When the seed is planted, it germinates if the right conditions are available. The radicle grows downwards, while the embryo leaf progresses upwards and breaks the soil. In the second stage, vegetative growth is experienced whereby the root system is established to provide water and minerals while the leaves start producing food through photosynthesis.

At the flowering stage, the male part (tassel) forms three days before the emergence of silky hairs at the head of the cob. During fruiting, fertilization takes place when pollen grains from the tassel land on the female silky hairs thus leading to the formation of kernels. At maturity, all growth process stop, and the corn start dying to release seeds back to the soil for the lifecycle to restart.

References

Odell’s World. (N.d.). . Web.

Sharpe, K. (2017). . Web.

Wijewardana, C., Henry, W. B., Hock, M. W., & Reddy, K. R. (2016). Growth and physiological trait variation among corn hybrids for cold tolerance. Canadian Journal of Plant Science, 96(4), 639-656.

Wright, J. J. (2017). . Web.