It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tomatoes can 'eat' insects

page: 3
38
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by andy1033
reply to post by grantbeed
 


lol, sounds like a b movie script.



It was a good B movie script.
Just have a recording of the song 'Puberty Love' handy and you will be fine.




posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by maybee
 


I used to go in manually and take them out. I could always tell where they were because their droppings were very noticable.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Thank you. This is a great find. I will add this to my list "alternative source for proteins"

I've read that tomatoes with beans and maize should be a good substitute for proteins from meat. Could be true



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 02:39 AM
link   
what im curious about is time frame

i may be wrong but id imagine it takes a while for a insect to die from being trapped by a tomato

now if the insect is trapped, how does it become untrapped and fall to the ground?

then after falling to the ground how long does it take before the plants roots can actually utilize the insects nutrients?


this seems more to be like the common cycle of life and food chain


things die,they decompose and are absorbed by living organisms


id say its nothing more then coincidence that these insects become trapped

id be highly shocked if there was a conscious effort on behalf of the plants to trap these insects and eventually let them go once dead to absorb the nutrients



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 04:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 


ur an idiot



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Hmmm, quite an interesting article... But I do have to pick at it
. Just the way it's written it's kind of giving the indication that certain plants being carnivorous is something newly discovered. I mean, many plants attain nutrients from decaying animals, wether they be insects or larger (as article mentions), so is that not what 'actually' makes them carnivorous? Not, in fact. How they attain the animals/insects.

For instance plants could be familliarised in example to animals (scavengers) which eat the remains of other animals but do not actually predate upon them. Some predator has done the work for them, and they just take advantage of what's been left.

The possible behaviours that have been overlooked in plants is rather interesting however
.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Beyar]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by grantbeed
 


A catchy title no doubt!


This is nothing new to a master gardener. Most people don't consider plants as having "evolved". The concept of evolution is similar to war. For instance an insect species utilizes a plant species as a food source. The plant species if it is not to be eradicated by being over harvested by the now prospering insect species develops a natural defense, typically through genetic mutation followed by natural selection, or perishes. For instance the plants could develop a chemical defense that makes them repulsive (smell), camouflaged (color), or distasteful (poisonous) to their attackers. In this case the tomato, in the nightshade family, developed a number of defenses including the "hairs", a physical barrier to the insects. Physical barriers can take many forms. Hairy stems, tough stems, thorns, sticky sap and even armored, floating seeds like a coconut. Once the plant's insect defense has been developed the insect might then develop a response through mutation, a way to overcome the new barrier. Longer legs, a long tongue, tougher shell, wings to fly to the top of the plant, almost anything you could imagine. This could start out by let's say only the insects with the longest legs are unaffected by the hairs. Or the strongest wings. You can just imagine.

This could seemingly go on ad infinitum, a back and forth battle of new defenses and then corresponding methods of attack. These changes in the battle could take tens of thousands of years to come about. These changes are in part what Darwin viewed in the microcosm of the Galapagos Islands.

That in some small way the defender goes on the offensive is not surprising. The dead insects are a ready source of nutrients why wouldn't the tomato species make serendipitous use? The tomatoes are not thinking for themselves it's just that they happen to be there when "stuff" happens. If the hairiest plants, the ones that effectively kill insects, survive more often than not perhaps due to the increased nutrients, then they will by natural selection be the ones that multiply, successfully passing the "hairy" trait along to the new generations.

The following link describes how a chemical defense (alkaloids) developed by tomatoes and other members of the nightshade plant family affect humans that eat them.

What are nightshades and in which foods are they found?

Consider that this is one website and their findings likely differ from other sources. This topic is widely covered on the web and I encourage you if interested and/or worried by the tomatoes you ingest to research this topic further.

Bon appétit!



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Hemisphere
 


very good points indeed. I agree, the title that "telegraph news" used definatley paints a slightly different picture than whats actually happening!

A very interesting discovery that I feel will benefit from much more study and a less glorified msm story.

I like your points about plants and insects evolving. Surely everything on Earth is evolving even just a little.

There is an article I think its on BBC or Telegraph yesterday about a certain species of bird that has evolved to stay at home over the winter rather than fly from the UK to Spain, all because of garden bird feeders. pretty cool.

g



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brainiac
reply to post by rubyeyes
 


Human beings are meat eaters.
I don't understand how vegetarians survive without ill effects.


Maybe study the physiology of humans sometimes, our stomachs, teeth and hands are not even comparable to a true meat eating animal...

FYI meat doesn't contain some magical nutrient that's not obtainable from plant sources

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Rawhemp]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Hemisphere beat me to it. Tomatoes are a member of the nightshade family as well as potatoes.

Tomatoes are Evil


Anyone on a strict Macrobiotic diet wouldn't touch 'em.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Anamnesis]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Anamnesis
 


That site is dedicated for tomato "bashing"

"wolf peach" with the colour of blood, not to mention traces of Nicotine

As the smokers are doomed cause of bacterias in cigarettes and tomato eaters as well. Whats the point of getting old, if you're not to do the things that makes you wanna grow old ? The glass is half full instead of half empty
So all what's left is... chocolate




[edit on 6-12-2009 by flymetothemoon]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   
reply to post by flymetothemoon
 


Flyme, that is one fascinating site that Anamnesis posted the link for. I had no idea there was such opposition to tomatoes. There is truth there to be sure but what is lost is the old adage "all things in moderation". The alkaloids, not to be confused with the "Herculoids" of my childhood, can be problematic for some people with the listed health problems. That's not everyone as we know and tomatoes and the nightshades are not alone in being problematic for human and animal diets. Most plants pose problems for human ingestion. How many people have allergies to corn, wheat, peanuts and the list goes on. That's not a modern phenomenon, there have always been people with food problems that went misdiagnosed and largely misunderstood until recent times.

We have to keep in mind that virtually nothing in the natural world developed specifically to be food for humans. Why would anything do that? Humans were a recent introduction to the planet. Typically food sources develop along with the feeding species. For instance grass species developed in concert with ungulates feeding on them. And so a deer or buffalo is nourished by the grass and then fertilizes the prairie with droppings, tills the soil by scratching and scuffing, scatters the seeds by migrating and more. Growth patterns, seed dispersal, drought tolerance and more are influenced by the feeding species. In my opinion we humans are not vegans or carnivores except by choice. Humans lived and moved unpredictably so that food and feeder did not have time to develop in parallel. Humans were much more opportunistic moving to where the the food we sampled didn't harm us. We've always been "shoppers", omnivores capable of feeding from various sources. Just my opinion folks, choose your own nourishment. Je répète, bon appétit!



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed
reply to post by Hemisphere
 


I like your points about plants and insects evolving. Surely everything on Earth is evolving even just a little.

There is an article I think its on BBC or Telegraph yesterday about a certain species of bird that has evolved to stay at home over the winter rather than fly from the UK to Spain, all because of garden bird feeders. pretty cool.



That's an important point grant, evolution typically is "just a little". Typically so little in our lifetime that we don't recognize it. Now the birds changing their migration patterns to fit the modern feeders, well that is one example of how we can influence and speed up evolution. We can only wonder that if some bird species lost the ability and/or instincts to migrate, what would happen if humans did not continue to provide food? Would they quickly evolve a new survival strategy or perish? I wouldn't want to find out. But I think over the short-term we could surmise they would once again take up migration. Hunger has a way of moving all those capable to where the food is.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Hemisphere
 




what would happen if humans did not continue to provide food? Would they quickly evolve a new survival strategy or perish?


Exactly. Its amazing when you think about it. Humans are likely responsible for a fair bit of evolution of many creatures, even just a tiny amount of evolution.

Everything from Vegetables to things like Birds, Foxes, Fish.... .... its possible we could be influencing a whole lot of species without really thinking about it much.

whether its hundreds, thousands, or even 25yrs ago, many things have since changed a lot in our world that could influence certain creatures.

amazing!


[edit on 7-12-2009 by grantbeed]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Hemisphere
 

Actually i find that site amazing and fascinating as well. As same for you're post. Allergic reactions ref. tomatoes you point out. Peanuts in particular.

I did some reading and found out that scientists discovered that a reason for allergic reactions towards tomatoes is caused by the protein Profilin.


Profilin is the major allergen present in birch, grass, and other pollen.



Profilins are proteins of molecular weights of roughly 14 - 16 kDa. They are present as single genes in yeast, insects, and worms, and as multiple genes in many other organisms including plants. In mammalian cells, four profilin isoforms have been discovered; profilin-I is expressed in most tissues while profilin-II is predominant in brain and kidney.


Source :Wiki Profilin.


Allergic to tomatoes? It’s more likely than you think – up to 16 percent of people are sensitive to tomatoes, adding extra complications to life in a world of free-flowing ketchup, tomato sauce and burgers with the works. It’s not tomatoes themselves that are at fault, it’s a small protein called Profilin. By silencing two genes responsible for Profilin production in tomatoes, scientists can create non-allergenic fruit that are otherwise completely normal in taste, texture and appearance.


source : webecoist.com







[edit on 7-12-2009 by flymetothemoon]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by flymetothemoon
reply to post by Hemisphere
 

Actually i find that site amazing and fascinating as well. As same for you're post. Allergic reactions ref. tomatoes you point out. Peanuts in particular.

I did some reading and found out that scientists discovered that a reason for allergic reactions towards tomatoes is caused by the protein Profilin.


Profilin is the major allergen present in birch, grass, and other pollen.



Profilins are proteins of molecular weights of roughly 14 - 16 kDa. They are present as single genes in yeast, insects, and worms, and as multiple genes in many other organisms including plants. In mammalian cells, four profilin isoforms have been discovered; profilin-I is expressed in most tissues while profilin-II is predominant in brain and kidney.


Source :Wiki Profilin.


Allergic to tomatoes? It’s more likely than you think – up to 16 percent of people are sensitive to tomatoes, adding extra complications to life in a world of free-flowing ketchup, tomato sauce and burgers with the works. It’s not tomatoes themselves that are at fault, it’s a small protein called Profilin. By silencing two genes responsible for Profilin production in tomatoes, scientists can create non-allergenic fruit that are otherwise completely normal in taste, texture and appearance.


source : webecoist.com



Fly, this comes under the category "You learn something new every day." for me. That's an excellent find. I didn't know about profilin.

This genetic modification of food on the other hand is a very hot topic here on ATS. As for me, I remain skeptical but open to these advancements. You might already know all about this topic. For those that don't there are corporations that genetically alter seeds and plants for various "advantageous" traits. And so you can for example create a crop of corn that repels corn-damaging insects. Thus protecting the crop while cutting back on pesticide use. That by itself might seem a good thing but the other side of that is folks worry that these genetic modifications will have unintended side effects when the food is consumed. The thinking is largely that the genetically modified produce does not occur in nature so that we, still having a connection to the natural world for our genetics, would suffer consequences from not having built up and adapted from generations of exposure to these new "frankenfoods".

No one would argue against having non-allergenic tomatoes for folks to enjoy. But as you know here on ATS big corporations are heavily scrutinized regarding their true motivations for these "advancements". Making a buck is always tied into this and rightly so. This is touched on in the second site you provided the link for. Thanks!



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by grantbeed
reply to post by Hemisphere
 




what would happen if humans did not continue to provide food? Would they quickly evolve a new survival strategy or perish?


Exactly. Its amazing when you think about it. Humans are likely responsible for a fair bit of evolution of many creatures, even just a tiny amount of evolution.

Everything from Vegetables to things like Birds, Foxes, Fish.... .... its possible we could be influencing a whole lot of species without really thinking about it much.

whether its hundreds, thousands, or even 25yrs ago, many things have since changed a lot in our world that could influence certain creatures.

amazing!




Do yourself a favor, watch the Botany of Desire. It actually goes into depth about this theory when talking about apples and potatoes, in addition to other plants. Here is the link to the PBS videos: video.pbs.org...



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:02 PM
link   
The vegitarian argument against meat eating lost the day stemcell tech started.

Soon sheets of meet will be grown in giant tanks and all of us can enjoy our bacon guilt free. Maybe even try some bald eagle.... or even geneticly engineer jackalope meat. mmmmmm jackalope.........



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:07 PM
link   
As a gardeners who loves her tomato plants all i can say is WOW, tomatoes are even better than I thought they were!

fascinating stuff I'll have to check out those links posted above



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Hemisphere
 

Thanks for you're interest about the protein.
Genetic modification of food... I believe we did not see the "top of that mountain yet", and i find you're views on these matters very important. These days we have to be critical, and as you point out, we don't know very much about the side effects by consuming this kind of food. And how does it effect the ecosystem...Lots of things to consider

In any case i believe cooked tomatoes are better for health, than eating raw...



[edit on 7-12-2009 by flymetothemoon]



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join