| ▲ | skmurphy 6 hours ago |
| key points about wheat Gross (the Italian farmer) discovered in 1990 his attic: + It fared better during droughts, growing so tall that it overshadowed the weeds. It didn’t need fertilizer or herbicides. + It's height can be a liability. Heavy winds, rains and hail can make the tall stems flip over before the grain ripens, ruining harvests. + Working with the lab of Teofilo Vamerali, Perobelli determined that the grain was Triticum turgidum—literally “swollen wheat” in Latin. Known in English as “poulard wheat,” it had originally evolved in what today are Turkey, Egypt and other nearby Mediterranean countries. And searching agricultural references, Perobelli found that it had been grown in Italy, too, until farmers shifted toward higher-yield commercial varieties. That solved the mystery of the seed bag stashed away in the attic: It had survived because Grossi’s grandfather saved some of the heritage grains. |
|
| ▲ | loufe 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I know I tend to like some takeaway "summary" comments on HN, but this one just feels like snippets from an LLM reading the article. What's the thinking? The original text isn't particularly long or dense, and this isn't commentary. |
| |
| ▲ | vineyardmike 2 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | What’s the thinking on pointing out everything that could maybe but probably not be “AI Slop”? I wasn’t going to click on the click-bait headline without understanding the topic better, so the length of the original was unknown and irrelevant to me. The above comment tersely explains it enough to satisfy my prerequisite. The comment, “slop” or not, was useful. When slop fills comments with junk and fake commentary, it’s far more annoying and detrimental than a basic summary. Slop-policing is exhausting to read - just downvote or flag trash instead of adding more noise that takes away from the actual content. | |
| ▲ | skmurphy 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's hand curated verbatim extracts designed to encourage HN members to read the full article. The clickbait title does not provide accurate context for the article which details events from 1990. Reasonable people may differ and your mileage may vary. What were your key takeaways from the article? I left out the points about shortcomings of Bourlag's wheat and the value of genetic diversity in a population. But my focus was to encourage people to read an article I found significant. On a side note I don't use AI to craft HN comments beyond sometimes using Grammarly to check them for basic errors. | | |
| ▲ | dawnerd 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ironically that sounds like something an llm would say in a reply. Not saying you did or anything just kinda funny how it reads. | | |
| |
| ▲ | tejohnso 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | A lot of submissions have comments about how the article is "AI slop" or that a comment comes from an LLM. What is the point of repeatedly pointing this out? One person's AI slop is another person's useful and intriguing submission. In this case someone points out a comment is LLM generated and it turns out it isn't. So what if it was? It was a useful comment either way, and your ability to correctly identify LLM generated content is not perfect, and is likely to become less accurate over time. | | |
| ▲ | wahnfrieden 31 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Community is oriented around policing each others content (upvote downvote flag vouch). The behaviors spill over into the other lever (reply) |
| |
| ▲ | barney54 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What do you mean “what’s the thinking?” | | |
|
|
| ▲ | ahartmetz 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Height is a solvable problem today. Chemical growth regulators make wheat shorter and prevent it from buckling and falling over. They aren't the most suspect chemicals, but not exactly above all suspicion neither... |
| |
| ▲ | benjiro29 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Height is a solvable problem today. Chemical growth regulators Or you do what Claudio Grossi did, and you mix the ancient grain with short growing grains that add stability. Sometimes the solution is simpler then just throwing chemicals at the problem. | | |
| ▲ | hommelix 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is a great practical approach, but when you harvest the crop you get a mix of higher crop and lower crop. It is more difficult to sell some mix than a pure crop with known properties. Technically, it would be possible to build a harvester with two cutters at different heights to separate the crops, but I've never seen one. | | |
| ▲ | benjiro29 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You forgot about the height. It will overshadow the smaller crop, and lack of sunlight on this smaller crop may simply not produce any ears as a result. Just a "balcony farmer" but that is what i have seen with most plants that are overshadowed by dense/taller plants. | | |
| ▲ | lelandfe 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | A good story that touches on this is the Wizard and the Prophet, covering Norman Borlaug's efforts to crossbreed wheat that wasn't too tall, was resistant to blight, etc. | | |
| |
| ▲ | Retric 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That’s true in generation 1, but breeding isn’t a single generation. You repeat things across generations until you find a stable mix. | |
| ▲ | saalweachter 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You just raise the head. You harvest the top crop, the one you want, cutting above the lower height, then go back through and make a second pass with the head lower. You'll lose some of the lower crop, crushed under the wheels, but it was there as bonus anyway. |
| |
| ▲ | ahartmetz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It seems like the genes that cause long stalks also have other benefits, otherwise they'd have been bred out a long time ago. At least that is what I figure. | | |
| ▲ | aDyslecticCrow 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Short grains are modern; - allow modern machines to harvest it more easily - move slighly more of the plants energy into the seed - prevent wind damage. (small farms bordered with trees was more typical historically) On the historical side; - The long stalks allow the crop to be bundled and dried without the seed touching the ground. - It makes the stalks themselves useful as a building material in walls, roofs, isolation, bedding. - It makes for a good grip as the seeds are pulled form the stalks with an historical thresher. In short, we didn't start breeding grains to be short until modern post industrial farming techniques. Short grain does provide better yield on industrial mono-crop farming. But would have been seen as worse historically. | | |
| ▲ | kinj28 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Problem with modern grains
1) gluten
2) weed killers/ pesticides
3) lack of nutritional value My father and many other people in my family increased to neutral millets and started giving up wheat as much as they can. Those problems are worth solving for or roll back to grossini seeds and use his creative technique to not let it withered by wind and let’s you have better nutritional value | | |
| ▲ | quixoticelixer- 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | Old grains still have plenty of gluten, and aren't immune to weeds or pests and have more or less the same nutritional value. | |
| ▲ | Filligree an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Did older grains have more gluten? I might try to search them out just for that reason. |
| |
| ▲ | quixoticelixer- 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Lodging is still a big problem even with modern varieties and growth regulators and even pre-modern wheat plants were probably shorter than they were originally. |
| |
| ▲ | skmurphy 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | They confer advantage over many weeds according to the article. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | pseudohadamard 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Friends of mine found some unknown seeds in a rental they'd just moved into and planted it. When they saw what sprouted they decided they should probably burn the evidence, slowly, one bud at a time. |
|
| ▲ | ButlerianJihad 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Tall wheat fields are a significant plot device in Klara and the Sun. Not to mention the various woody fibers involved in Wicker. Yes, I spent an interesting week hanging out at the cinema! |
| |
|
| ▲ | ltbarcly3 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| These are all just unsubstantiated claims from someone promoting a product. The reason the entire world switched to dwarf varieties is that full height wheat falls over in heavy storms and this can lead to a loss of entire harvests and major famines. This grain, while interesting, is far far less productive than modern varieties and less efficient to grow. It's valuable for genetic diversity and rediscovering it is wonderful and valuable, but it is more or less worthless for farmers as anything other than a novelty. |
| |
| ▲ | quixoticelixer- 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's not really just a storm risk. The higher yeilding your wheat the higher risk of lodging, so growing tall wheat in poorer conditions is fine, but the higher the grain weight the higher the risk of lodging. |
|