Attn:David Erskine/Parasitic plants etc...

David Erskine erskine at griffith.dwr.csiro.au
Tue Oct 7 19:23:44 EST 1997


In article <34343049.0 at nt.dave-world.net>,
   "Dodderin' Ol' Don" <donw1948 at NOSPAM.dave-world.net> wrote:
> David & Richard -
>
>Excuse me for nosing into this thread but ...
>
>>Sugar is easy to transport and stores well. Preferably, sugar
>>will be synthesised where it is used, using local carbon,
>>hydrogen and oxygen. Food combusts to CO2 and water, and CO2 and
>>water can, in principle, be made back into sugar again, using
>>electric energy from, say, radioisotopes.
>
>Doesn't "food" constitute more than just sugar (and what particular sugar do
>you have in mind?)

Of course. But the quantities are much less than for sugar, and once the food 
production system is set up, other nutrients are recycled as sterilised human 
waste.

>
>>>    I am unaware of any parasitic plants that may be or are capable of
>>>providing any kind of significant nutrition. Maybe, someone out there
>>>knows of some.
>
>How about the mushroom & fungus families (mycilea? spelling?) Would it be
>possible to genetically engineer a fungus that would not depend upon decayed
>plant matter?

Parasitic plants tap into the sap of photosynthetic plants. I suppose 
mushrooms could be changed to do the same. Or parasitic plants are grown and 
harvested, and mushrooms feed off decaying parasitic plants.

The point is to get food plants which do not depend on photosynthesis.

David Erskine



More information about the Plantbio mailing list