InfoFarm: The NAL Blog: National Agricultural Library

An apple sits atop a stack of one dollar bills It's never wise to gamble your life savings on a poker game, but if you've seen the latest food price projections, you can understand the temptation.

On Friday USDA's Economic Research Service released its current forecast, and it doesn't look so good. Food prices are expected to rise 5% to 6%, despite the recent drops in oil.

Maybe you don't want to hear about it. After all, you're going to know soon enough, like the next time you go buy a dozen eggs. But maybe you're the kind who needs to put it in context. If so, read on.

The BBC is using real people buying real food from real stores to track changing food costs in eight cities across the globe.

Forget the statistical averages based on official price indices. This is person-in-the-street reality pricing.

BBC reporters are heading to the same stores each week and noting the prices for five of that country's staple foods. (These are foods that are most likely to be found in the typical shopper's grocery bag.)

For example, here in Washington, DC that means bread, milk, potatoes, beef and eggs. In Delhi, it shifts to rice, ground flour, lentils, onions and milk. You get the idea.

Then those costs are tracked over time.

At this point, the BBC's pricing index has been active for only a few weeks, but you can see how, so far, some places have held steady more or less (Brussels, DC, Moscow), while others have taken a bit of a ride (Jakarta, Skopje).

Then, on each city's page (linked via the city names above), you can see what item on the list might be driving the price change. For example, potatoes take the blame in Skopje, while in Jakarta, it's clearly eggs, at least at the moment.

Where will prices head next week? Next month? Next year? Keep an eye on the BBC price index, and you'll find out. Maybe seeing it in these colorful little charts will help you prepare for seeing it on the stickers at the store.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on October 27, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< The Adventures Continue | Main | And Now a Word from Our Sponsor >>

October 16, 2008

On World Food Day, How Many Go Hungry?

A starving child exhibiting extreme protein deficiency Today is World Food Day, a worldwide event established to increase awareness and spark action around food security.

And the numbers say we need it.

Over 8 million people have died of hunger so far this year, with nearly 900 million people undernourished worldwide.

Seventy-eight percent of malnourished children live in countries with food surpluses.

Thirty-four nations have experienced food riots and protests over the past eighteen months.

All this while, in the United States alone, we waste over a quarter of the country's food -- about 96 billion pounds -- every year [based on 1995 data (PDF | 104KB)].

Globally, we have seen some progress, but far too many children and adults go to sleep hungry every night.

In 1963, in his address to the World Food Congress, President Kennedy emphasized our need to do more than just make progress.

So long as freedom from hunger is only half achieved, so long as two-thirds of the nations have food deficits, no citizen, no nation, can afford to be satisfied. We have the ability, as members of the human race, we have the means, we have the capacity to eliminate hunger from the face of the earth in our lifetime. We need only the will.

Do we have the will?

Here are some things you can do to combat hunger in your community:

Learn about hunger, about who is vulnerable to it and the many factors that contribute to it.
Contact others, from community groups to elected officials to see what they're doing and to encourage them to act.
Imagine problems and possible solutions to help build empathy and inspire innovation.
Act by growing a garden and donating the produce, organizing a food drive, or "adopting" a person or family in need.

If nothing else, take a few minutes to listen to President Kennedy's speech and hear how little has changed in 45 years.

To know how to conquer the problem and not conquer it would be a disgrace for this generation.

The problem, as we know, is still there, and it is a disgrace. What are we going to do about it?

Image above is in the public domain. Used courtesy of the Centers for Disease Control, Public Health Image Library, Dr. Lyle Conrad.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on October 16, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Hi, Do something to help those hungry people in Africa or India.

Submitted by: cheritycall on October 27, 2008 07:39 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

To Those Who Have Done Something About It

World Food Prize logo Bob Dole and George McGovern will formally receive the 2008 World Food Prize today in a ceremony in Des Moines, Iowa. The two former senators and presidential candidates are being honored for creating the George McGovern-Robert Dole International Food for Education and Nutrition Program.

Since 2000, the program has provided meals to feed more than 22 million children in 41 countries and boosted school attendance by an estimated 14 percent overall and by 17 percent for girls.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on October 16, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< This Close to a Nobel Prize | Main | On World Food Day, How Many Go Hungry? >>

October 02, 2008

Photo of the Week: Shopping Is a SNAP

Art, Artifacts and Photos , Food and Nutrition

A woman grocery shops with her two young sons

Use permitted for promotion, informational and educational purposes of a non-profit nature.

Yesterday, while InfoFarm was celebrating its birthday, USDA's Food Stamp Program was marking a rebirth of sorts.

The federal program is still there, of course, but it hit the scene with a new name and is now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP.

The name change, a product of the new Farm Bill, more accurately reflects what the program is about, namely, food assistance and nutrition education.

The image above comes from the SNAP Photo Gallery, which serves up a collection of photos depicting nutrition education and outreach messages. These photos, available in both low- and high-resolution, cover food shopping, meals and meal prep, nutrition education and physical activities.

The photos are designed for use by nutrition educators and others involved in administering the program, but in fact, anyone may use them for any non-profit promotion, informational or educational purpose.

The gallery is part of the larger SNAP-Ed Connection site put together by a team of some great folks who happen to sit just down the hall from me.

The site, a treasure-trove of training and continuing ed resources, delivers curricula, lesson plans, research, participant materials and professional development tools for nutrition educators. It also includes an amazing recipe database (which I've actually mentioned before), that lets you use up the last of whatever you've got in the pantry or fridge by searching by ingredients. Or, if you're working under a budget, search for recipes by cost per serving.

If you're prone to weak puns, you might say it's a snap -- but I would never do such a thing.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Art, Artifacts and Photos and Food and Nutrition on October 02, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Happy Bloggiversary! | Main | Did You Know USDA Did This? >>

September 30, 2008

You COOL With This?

Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade

Two eggplants stamped with Country-of-origin labeling (COOL) became mandatory today. What does that mean for you?

On the one hand, it means that lots of foods you regularly buy in grocery stores will be sporting a sticker, a stamped rubber band or a modified wrapper -- or will be displayed under signs -- letting you know where they came from.

Foods required to be labeled include:

raw beef, veal, lamb, pork, goat, and chicken
fish and shellfish, whether wild or farm-raised
fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables
peanuts, pecans and macadamia nuts
ginseng

However, not every place you buy food is covered by the law. Butcher shops, fish markets and smaller grocers that invoice less than $230,000 annually are off the hook, as are the country's restaurants, cafeterias and food stands.

Add to that that plenty of foods aren't on that list because they've been "processed," and you'll still find plenty of foods not labeled through COOL.

Some examples might help (PDF | 80 KB):

A package of raw chicken legs is covered. Breaded chicken fingers are not. (The breading makes them processed.)
Farm-raised salmon is covered. Smoked salmon is not. (Hot or cold smoking makes them processed.)
Frozen peas are covered. Canned peas are not. (Because they're cooked on the way to being canned.)
Fresh strawberries are covered. Dried strawberries are not. (Drying changes things.)
Raw peanuts are covered. Roasted peanuts are not. (Yup, the roasting does it.)

Even combining a couple of things that are covered by the rule makes the uncovered, so strike the frozen peas and carrots medley from the COOL list.

But that doesn't mean you'll never know where your peas-and-carrots blend came from. Anything pre-packaged abroad remains covered by the Tariff Act of 1930 and will still be marked as an import despite its exclusion from COOL.

On the other hand, if those peas and carrots are imported to the U.S. in bulk, and then combined and packaged here, then they'll have no label.

Yes, it can be confusing, but USDA is working on it.

Earlier today the Department held a news conference about the rule's implementation. There Under Secretary of Agriculture Bruce Knight noted that they've received 175 to 200 comments on the rule and will be taking those under advisement. Now, however, the rule is going forward as-is.

How are you feeling about it: Confused? Pleased? Irritated?

A Consumer Reports poll from June 2007 indicated that "92 percent of consumers agree that imported foods should be labeled by their country of origin," but does this rule get it done for you? Let us know.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade on September 30, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

I am glad to see some changes being made and encourage even more acurate labeling. I was surprised the other day when I got home from the grocery store (I was in a hurry there and didn't really pay attention to all the labeling) and the beef I planned to cook for supper had a small label on it that said "from USA or Mexico". I had assumed all the fresh meat we buy here would have been produced here and really felt that I had been caught off guard against something that I should not have even had to be concerned about - sort of swindled in a way. I guess it is customer beware, but I feel like we owe it to people to do the best possible job to keep our food supply as safe as possible and to support USA agriculture as much as possible. We see what kind of shap we are in by depending on foreign countries for oil. Woe unto us if we ever become so dependent on others for food!!!

Thanks for the labels - I will watch more closely!

Submitted by: Anonymous on October 2, 2008 12:13 PM

Oh, yes, meat's treatment under COOL can be rather confusing. The FAQ on COOL gives more detail, but in short, meat is labeled as "from the U.S." (and only the U.S.) only if the animals are born, raised and slaughtered here, or spend less than 60 days passing through Canada on the way from Alaska to slaughter in the lower 48.

If U.S. cattle or meat is "commingled" on production day with that from Mexico and/or Canada, then the label will reflect this mixed origin (e.g., "Product of U.S., Canada and Mexico").

Submitted by: Mary Ann on October 3, 2008 04:58 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Soldier-Farmers Plant Seeds of Peace | Main | Happy Bloggiversary! >>

August 28, 2008

Got Something to Say About Downer Cattle?

Outline of a beef cow's profile with Do you remember the big beef recall from earlier this year? That recall was prompted by a videotape showing workers at Westland's California slaughterhouse using a variety of cruel and inhumane methods to get "downer" cattle to stand for pre-slaughter inspection.

Yesterday the USDA announced a proposed rule to amend the Federal meat inspection regulations to prevent such downer cattle from entering the food supply at all. Instead, under the proposed rule, any cattle that becomes "non-ambulatory" at any time prior to slaughter would be condemned and disposed of.

This new rule would apply even to cattle that have already passed initial inspection.

This complete ban is meant to simplify and clarify inspection standards to prevent any further misunderstanding of the rules regarding downer cattle. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer also hopes it will "maintain consumer confidence in the food supply, . . . and, ultimately, . . . make a positive impact on the humane handling of cattle."

Do you think the proposed rule works? Do you see loopholes that need to be closed? Or does it over-step, hurting ranchers and/or meat producers in the process?

Given the widespread and vocal response to the beef recall in February, I'm guessing you have an opinion. Share it with us below.

And if you really want to participate in government, go a step further and submit your comments on the proposed rule to USDA. You'll find the full instructions for doing so in the last few paragraphs of yesterday's press release. The deadline is September 29, 2008.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on August 28, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Nice bog you have here. I pretty much lurk the internet when I'm bored and read all I can about the organic lifestyle, but I really liked you view on things. I'll bookmark the site and subscribe to the feed!

Submitted by: Acai Cleanse on September 4, 2008 08:52 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< What's In the New Farm Bill? | Main | The Football-Ag Connection >>

August 20, 2008

Tomato Love

Slices of tomatoes are arrayed side by side Tomatoes have gotten a lot of press this year. Salmonella outbreaks, unfortunately, will do that.

But with the official finger no longer pointing to tomatoes for that, the news pendulum seems to be swinging back the other way.

Good thing, too, since a sizable chunk of the U.S. now finds itself smack dab in the middle of fresh tomato season. After all, when folks have kitchen counters laden with golden, red and green tomatoes of various shapes and sizes, they can't really brook another story about what diseases could be lurking there, even if their backyard crop is a thousand miles or more from the alleged ground zero.

Enter Arthur Allen, whose centuries-spanning look at the tomato gets us back to the love so many feel for this succulent gift of summer.

Allen's article, "A Passion for Tomatoes" (Smithsonian, August 2008) wends its way from industrial production to organic farms, from genetic hybrids to heirlooms, and from 16th century Mexico to 21st century laboratories. He also criss-crosses the country, riding shotgun during a California tomato harvest and tasting transgenic varieties in Florida, all in an effort to understand the journey this favored veggie (fruit?) has traveled.

The piece delivers a well-timed reminder of how varied and valuable the tomato is, as if six weeks without them didn't remind us enough.

And Americans do love their tomatoes. They rank as the fourth most popular fresh-market vegetable behind potatoes, lettuce, and onions, and the country is one of the leading suppliers to the world, second only to China. (We're second to China a lot these days.)

But this summer I'm seeing that nothing can spoil tomato love like having too many of them. We're already pushing bags of them onto friends and looking for ideas on what to do with what's left.

The Food Stamp Nutrition Connection's Recipe Finder has helped, since I can find recipes based on ingredients, but if you have any ideas, send them along. I know I'm not alone in feeling the pressure of too many tomatoes.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Plants and Crops on August 20, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Just because this always comes to mind during Tomato conversations:

YouTube - You Say 'Tomato', I say 'Tomato'...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ3fjQa5Hls

Submitted by: Donna Herendeen on August 25, 2008 05:42 PM

Torrents, tomato(es), lots of sweet summer treats. Thanks for your fine work here! Rich and thick, cornstarch like was Donna's added YouTube tomato talk routine. What fun!

Thanks, again!

Submitted by: Karl Schneider on August 27, 2008 09:07 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< A Torrent of Blogs | Main | What's In the New Farm Bill? >>

August 11, 2008

Forbidden Fruit? Nope, Just Expensive

<< Photo of the Week: A Brooding Goat | Main | Can Strawberries Impact the Olympic Medal Count? >>

A bunch of red grapes How much are you willing to pay for a bunch of grapes?

That's all?

What if they're really, really tasty, "sweet but fresh at the same time, very well-balanced," and a product of 14 years of government-sponsored research?

Such is the pedigree of the new premium grape that was introduced in Japan today, and the top price fetched at auction hit nearly $910, or about $26 per grape.

Can you imagine what the wine will cost?

The newest delicacy, the Ruby Roman, a tomato-red grape about the size of a pingpong ball, obviously piqued the curiosity of those Japanese willing to pay luxury prices to have something unique.

The average price paid for the new variety hovered around $245 per bunch, which, you gotta admit, is amazingly steep, especially compared to the still-lofty $90 per bunch the highly favored Muscat of Alexandria grape garners in Tokyo markets.

When looked at in that light, I'm not sure what made the $910 bunch so special.

But the Japanese have shown themselves quite willing to pay a premium for fruit with built-in status.

In 2001 square watermelons hit the Japanese market at $83 each. I never heard how good they tasted, but they were touted for their simplified storage, easy cutting and unique look, all of which I can appreciate but still wouldn't pay fifteen times over average for.

How about you? How much would you pay for a funky fruit? Is the novelty really worth the expense?

Or would you rather just stick to growing regular fruit the regular way?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Plants and Crops on August 11, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

July 25, 2008

Why Food Prices Are Surging

Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade

A graph showing a steadily rising red line Everybody wants to know what's pushing food prices. Everybody also has an answer.

Of course, the answers are all different. Too many people, too much ethanol, too little surplus. Bad policies, bad weather, bad luck.

In one way or the other, it seems they all end up at the old Econ 101 stand-by, supply and demand.

But we all know the answer is much more involved than can be delivered in a sound bite.

Two days ago, two different reports looking at the quick rise in food prices hit the streets, and they each try to give a fuller answer to this widespread question.

The first, from USDA's Economic Research Service, actually updates one the agency released in May.

The second, sponsored by the Farm Foundation, a publically-funded non-profit organization, was authored by three economists from Purdue University.

Both reports agree: The rise in food prices results from a complex interplay of factors.

The Farm Foundation report points to three high-level forces driving the price increases:

global changes in production and consumption of key commodities,
the depreciation of the dollar, and
growth in the production of bioofuels.

The ERS report also includes these three factors, while adding on a few more, including rising energy costs, increases in agricultural costs of production, and even bad weather.

Of course, the economists from both research teams provide the charts, graphs and numbers to support these conclusions, though, interestingly, neither report tries to divvy up the responsibility for the price spikes among the contributing factors. (Those wielding agendas rarely show such restraint.)

I encourage you to read the reports yourself, but even moreso, I encourage you to resist the urge to oversimplify this complicated and involved issue.

Everybody's right on this one. The answer is "D. All of the above."

And it's going to take all of us to find our way through it.

With that in mind, what's your answer to the food crisis?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade on July 25, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< The Frugality Fallacy | Main | Are You Ready to Bet the Farm? >>

June 23, 2008

Yes, We Have More Bananas

Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade , Plants and Crops

A bunch of bright yellow Cavendish bananas If you're a typical American, you eat, on average, two bananas a week. And if you buy those bananas at a typical American grocery store, you're getting the same kind of banana each time, a variety called the Cavendish.

Fifty years ago, that was not the case.

My parents and grandparents grew up eating a different kind of banana, the Gros Michel, that, from all reports, was both tastier and better suited for export. But for all its popularity, the Gros Michel had a weakness: it was highly susceptible to Panama disease, a fungal disease that, over time, wiped out the Gros Michel.

Enter the Cavendish.

Resistant to the Panama disease that felled the Gros Michel, the Cavendish surged to the top export spot and never looked back. Now, however, its position is threatened, not by a competing cultivar, but by a strain of Panama disease that neither it nor its growers can combat.

Back in March NAL hosted a forum that examined this situation, along with the importance of bananas and plantains in meeting the food and economic needs in tropical regions around the world. As it turns out, the Cavendish is just one piece -- though certainly a big commercial piece -- in the sustaining role bananas play around the globe.

Nearly one thousand other varieties of bananas populate tropical regions, and most never leave their home countries. These other varieties sustain the farmers that grow them and serve as staples in their surrounding communities.

But economic forces are understandably pushing small growers to abandon these other varieties in favor of marketable ones. That trend, however, threatens banana diversity.

What can we do?

While scientists chart the banana's genome, preserve their genetic resources in genebanks, and work to counteract the diseases that plague them, consumers can help by buying more than just the Cavendish. Be willing to spend a little more to try something new and to send the message to your grocer that there is a market for other varieties and the products made from them.

You can also learn more about the banana in all its forms. Over the last two years alone three major books on the banana and its history -- political, cultural, economic and otherwise -- have hit the shelves:

The Banana: Empires, Trade Wars, and Globalization by James Wiley
Banana: The Fate of the Fruit that Changed the World by Dan Koeppel
Bananas: How the United Fruit Company Shaped the World by Peter Chapman

My library colleagues have also pulled together a collection of resources covering the agricultural and scientific research focused on the banana, along with nutritional info and recipes.

Obviously, there is much to learn, but there is also much to eat. With over one thousand varieties of bananas out there, you'd better get started. Stop back to tell us which ones you like, and if you've got a good recipe for banana bread, send it along. It's one of my favs.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Plants and Crops on June 23, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

I can’t say I know a lot about bananas and I have never really looked for different varieties. Occasionally my local grocer will have plantains, but I will have to check to see if there are multiple varieties of bananas. –Thanks for calling this to my attention. Are any bananas being grown in the US right now? If so, where and what kind of volume?

Alex Tiller
http://blog.alextiller.com

Submitted by: Alex Tiller on June 25, 2008 02:26 PM

Alex,

According to USDA's Economic Research Service, "88 percent of all the U.S. farms producing bananas on a commercial scale were in Hawaii, with over 90 percent of total production acreage." (These numbers are based on the 2002 Census of Agriculture.)

That translates to about 20 million pounds of bananas out of Hawaii.

I'm still looking to see where the other 12 percent of banana-producing farms are in the U.S. I'd guess California and Florida, since they're the other locations known for growing tropical fruit, but I haven't found confirmation yet. Stay tuned.

Submitted by: Mary Ann on June 25, 2008 03:12 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Urban Farming & the D.C. Land Grant | Main | Photo of the Week: A California Wetland >>

June 20, 2008

Urban Farming & the D.C. Land Grant

Education , Food and Nutrition , Plants and Crops

An African-American farmer stands in a field of corn City farmer.

Sounds like a oxymoron at best, or a scathing insult at worst.

But two recent articles from decidedly "city" papers have exposed some depth and texture to the phrase.

Six weeks ago the New York Times ran a piece describing the urban agriculture movement that has sprung up in the Bronx and Brooklyn, along with other cities like Detroit, Milwaukee and Oakland.

There, hardworking city residents with green thumbs and lots of heart are turning vacant lots into farming plots. The food grown feeds themselves and their neighbors. They make a profit for their efforts, but more importantly, they provide fresh, local produce in places not used to getting such quality affordably.

Then today the Washington Post took a look at the University of the District of Columbia's designation as a land grant university in a decidedly urban area.

This designation, one more commonly associated with colleges and universities serving agricultural areas, calls on the school to provide a practical education to the common people, whether through formal education, less formal outreach and extension programs, or research related to the agricultural and family sciences.

UDC does all that through its youth programs, like 4-H and the Urban Agriculture Grasshoppers, and advanced research into issues relevant to the urban environment such as air pollution, obesity, juvenile violence and yes, food production.

To many, UDC's position as a land grant university makes no sense, but to others, these programs and others highlight the important role the university can play in the community.

What do you think? Is there a place for education "related to agriculture and the mechanic arts" in cities such as D.C.? If you already consider yourself a "city farmer," where do you go to learn about crops, critters and composting?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Education and Food and Nutrition and Plants and Crops on June 20, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

With fuel prices compounding the issues related to food prices, I am confident that we will see a renaissance in the ways and places people buy their food. It’s not just a matter of a consumer choosing to lower their carbon foot print. Local food may very well be cheaper once local distribution gets worked out.

Alex Tiller
http://blog.alextiller.com

Submitted by: Alex Tiller on June 25, 2008 02:30 PM

Thanks for the follow up.

Alex Tiller
http://blog.alextiller.com

Submitted by: Alex Tiller on June 26, 2008 02:01 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< A Safety Raft for the Midwest | Main | Yes, We Have More Bananas >>

June 03, 2008

Global Food Security Conference

Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade , Natural Resources & Environment

A green earth Today in Rome, heads of state from around the globe began an intensive three-day conference on food security, climate change and rising food and fuel prices. The conference, called by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, is intended to help countries devise sustainable solutions to rising food prices and to address the growing challenges of climate change and energy security.

Much of the conference is available online. Resources include conference documents and written remarks, along with audio and video webcasts of the sessions.

USDA Secretary Ed Schafer leads the U.S. delegation to the conference.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment on June 03, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Pineapples in Paradise | Main | Liquid Gold? >>

May 06, 2008

Pineapples in Paradise

Biography , Food and Nutrition , History of Agriculture , Marketing and Trade

A pineapple What comes to mind when you think of Hawai'i? Paradise, right? Sun, sand, surf, warm breezes . . . I'm with you.

Okay, but what about Hawaiian food? My top three: pineapple, macadamia nuts, and poi. (Not that I've ever had poi, but too much television has undoubtedly shaped my perceptions.)

But Hawai'i is no longer paradise for the pineapple. That industry, so closely tied with many Americans' vision of Hawai'i, is showing signs of struggle.

In 2006, Del Monte planted its last crop of pineapple, citing the expense of growing in Hawai'i as the prime reason for shutting down operations after 90 years in the islands. Their departure leaves just two pineapple companies in the state, Dole Food Hawai'i and Maui Pineapple Co.

But last year, the latter shuttered its pineapple cannery, the last one in the U.S. The closure brought an end to an era for many Hawaiians, but the company remains, redirecting its attention to fresh fruit and juice in an effort to stay profitable.

The bottom line talks loudly. Growers in Thailand, the Philippines, Brazil, China, India and Costa Rica can produce the fruit more cheaply, thrusting these countries to the top of list of suppliers worldwide (XLS|41 KB). As a result, the pineapple might become more symbol than reality in Hawai'i. Only time -- and the market -- will tell.

But in honor of pineapple's long, deep history in Hawai'i, and in conjunction with Asian Pacific American Heritage Month, let me point you to a couple of unique resources from the Center for Oral History at the University of Hawai'i at Manoa that celebrate this fantastic fruit and the people who've brought it to us for decades.

The first, a short video clip (Quicktime | 4.4 MB), shows Venicia Guiala, a former pineapple field worker, demonstrating how she prepared for work in the hot, dusty pineapple fields. If you prefer, you can read the transcript, but I heartily recommend the video. Seeing Mrs. Guiala putting on her scarves, goggles and hat conveys more strongly than the words how difficult and uncomfortable that job must be.

The second provides a short introduction to the Center's oral history project on Women Workers in Hawai'i's Pineapple Industry, a combination of narrative and oral history excerpts.

But for a more contemporary twist on pineapple processing, check out this clip from YouTube. The music makes it an almost mesmerizingly peaceful experience. (Though I'd appreciate someone telling me what the song "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes" has to do with peeling and coring pineapple.)

Finally, if you haven't given much thought to the role Asian-Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders have played and continue to play in our country's agricultural endeavors, jump over to NAL's site on Asian Pacific Americans in agriculture. Among many other things, you can learn from the resources there the unique niche Chinese immigrants filled in 1850s California; the key role Filipinos played in the formation of the United Farm Workers; and the impact of Alien Land Laws on Japanese immigrant farmers.

Aloha.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Biography and Food and Nutrition and History of Agriculture and Marketing and Trade on May 06, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Interesting blog post, Mary Ann. With Del Monte leaving Hawaii, the last two producers are Dole and Maui Pineapple. Maui Pine was the last to close their cannery on Maui, they did it earlier this year or late 2007. So all the fruit produced in Hawaii is for the fresh fruit market. The latest statistics shows that the acreage in pineapple in Hawaii is less than 14,000 acres and seed crops has now surpassed pineapple as the number crop in terms of farm gate values. Sugarcane, macadamia nuts and coffee round out the top 5. As for poi, taro, which is used to make poi, only 9% of the taro consumed in Hawaii is produced here. All of these statistics are from the NASS Hawaii state statistics.

Doug Vincent
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii

Submitted by: Doug Vincent on May 20, 2008 09:23 AM

Thanks for the added info, Doug. I have to admit that I did not even know that poi was made from taro. As my mom used to say, "You learn something new every day."

[Note to all: Doug originally submitted his comment in association with the entry "Amber Waves?", but I added it here to put it in its correct context.]

Submitted by: Mary Ann on May 20, 2008 09:29 AM

This decline in farming in the US is a call for citizens to celebrate the farming that still does exist. American Farmer (Welcome Books), coming out October 1, 2008, is a photographic book that does just that.
Paul Mobley's spectacular and telling images of farmers all over the states as well as Katrina Fried's interviews with farmers not only give readers insight into the importance of farming but they also make unknown farmers into familiar heros. Mr. Mobley traveled over 100,000 miles, from Alaska to Maine, taking over 20,000 photos in his quest to reveal the true face of American farming. American Farmer is a result of his journeys, and it will allow the public to understand the necessity and heroism of American Farming.

Check out the website for the book:
welcomebooks.com/americanfarmer

Submitted by: Welcome Books on June 11, 2008 02:50 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< How Much Does It Take? | Main | Global Food Security Conference >>

May 01, 2008

Amber Waves?

Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade , Plants and Crops

A field of winter wheat Are you feeling the pinch at the grocery store yet?

Higher food prices are creating unrest in some parts of the world and simple belt-tightening in others.

The Washington Post devoted this past week to exploring the current food crisis brought on by food shortages and spiking inflation. If you haven't yet read their five-part series, I recommend you do.

The New Economics of Hunger looks at skyrocketing grain prices and their impact on the global markets and the world's poor.

Where Every Meal Is a Sacrifice focuses on the situation in Mauritania and other poor countries that are forced to import most of their food.

Emptying the Breadbasket tells of the fall in wheat production in the U.S. as more farmers turn to corn and soybeans and examines some of the forces that led to the shift.

Siphoning Off Corn to Fuel Our Cars examines the tug-of-war over corn as food and fuel and identifies the winners, losers and ongoing fighters in the battle.

Clipping, Scrimping, Saving registers the impact of rising prices on American consumers across income levels and reveals what steps folks are taking to save money.

Telling graphics accompany each article in the series and reveal the impact of globalization on the world's economy and families' food supplies.

You can also hear Dan Morgan, Washington Post agriculture reporter and one of the series' authors, talk about what he learned while researching the series in an interview on C-SPAN. Morgan also answer questions during the hour-long video.

Of course, the global reach of these events means that far more than just the Post is writing about them. For other perspectives, you might also want to dip into the BBC's extensive coverage or read The Economist's recent cover story on what they termed The Silent Tsunami.

Finally, for information about food aid available from USDA and the Administration's response to recent events, see the Department's Food Aid page.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Plants and Crops on May 01, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Doug Vincent
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawaii.

Submitted by: Doug Vincent on May 19, 2008 06:14 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Lessons from the Amish | Main | How Much Does It Take? >>

April 17, 2008

Nutrition Tips on the Go

MyPyramid podcasts logo With summer just around the corner, any chance you're looking for a little nutritional inspiration to help lose that winter weight?

Turns out our friends over at USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP), the same folks who bring you MyPyramid.gov, have launched a few video podcasts in an effort to reach you cutting-edge, multi-media types.

These nutrition-oriented podcasts offer simple but often overlooked tips on ways to eat better and grow healthier.

The latest podcast looks at The MyPyramid Menu Planner, recently touted by the American Dietetic Association as the best meal and menu planner on the Web.

Hosted by Brian Wansink, Executive Director of the CNPP, the podcast delivers a simple tour of the Menu Planner, highlighting its ease and effectiveness. Wansink also points out the Menu Planner's usefulness for assessing how balanced your diet is and determining what small dietary changes you have to make to improve things. You can also use it to help build a list of what foods you need to buy the next time you go shopping.

So, check out the Menu Planner and the other MyPyramid podcasts and discover how small steps really can make a difference in your weight and health. And bonus points to those who listen to the podcast while exercising. You're an inspiration to us all!

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on April 17, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Somebody Out There Loves Us | Main | Earth, Baseball and the Federal Blogger >>

April 15, 2008

Two Shows Worth Watching (and Discussing)

Biography , Food and Nutrition , Organic Production , Plants and Crops

An Ear of Corn It's not often that we get two thought-provoking documentaries on agriculture and farming in the same week, but PBS is serving up a couple of conversation starters, beginning tonight.

"King Corn," a film looking at the corn's central role in American agriculture and food production, makes its television debut in just a few hours on the Emmy award-winning series Independent Lens, PBS's showcase for independent films. Not all PBS stations will be airing the show today, however, and many will be repeating it as well, so be sure to check your local listings for air times. You still might be able to catch it.

Here in the Washington area, Independent Lens will also be re-broadcasting "The Real Dirt on Farmer John" later this week, a 2006 film that follows an Illinois farmer, John Peterson, as he tries to transform his family farm in a way that is at odds with his community. Hopefully, this film too will crop up where you're at in the coming months, so keep checking those local listings.

If PBS lets you down, or you'd just rather watch on your own timetable, "The Real Dirt on Farmer John" is already available on DVD, and "King Corn" will be released later this month.

I haven't seen either film yet, so I'm very interested in seeing what they're about. And, of course, I'd love to hear your take on things. Once you've watched either or both, come back and let us know what you thought. I'm sure our community of readers can get a good discussion going.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Biography and Food and Nutrition and Organic Production and Plants and Crops on April 15, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Plowed Under | Main | Somebody Out There Loves Us >>

February 21, 2008

Cattle Abuse, Beef Recall Recap

Cattle Let me catch you up on all that has been happening with the investigation of Westland Meat Company, since USDA first suspended them at the end of last month.

As you recall, workers at Westland's California slaughterhouse were caught on tape using a variety of cruel and inhumane methods to get "downer" cattle to stand for pre-slaughter inspection.

In the immediate aftermath, USDA suspended Westland as a supplier to Federal food programs. Then school districts across the country, along with a few fast food chains, stopped serving ground beef from the company as a precaution.

Turns out, that was only the beginning.

A few days later, the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) suspended inspections at the plant after finding "clear violation of Federal regulations and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act." This step effectively closed the company until corrective actions document improved treatment of the animals.

That was followed by the largest meat recall in USDA history. The 143.4 million pounds of meat in the recall constituted Westland's entire production run from the last two years. Since FSIS determined violations occurred off and on during that time, all beef products produced then are considered "adulterated," though the chances of getting ill from the recalled meat are considered "remote."

The Department is working to identify the locations where meat from the Westland plant might have ended up. At this point, the Food and Nutrition Service has determined that one third of the meat under recall, about 50.3 million pounds, went to federal nutrition programs, with 19.6 million pounds of that consumed.

No associated illnesses have been reported.

As an ongoing precaution, the USDA has taken steps to increase inspections at the 900 establishments across the country that slaughter livestock. Though the Department does not believe inhumane handling of cattle is widespread, "The extra checks will give us a better handle on it," said Kenneth Peterson, FSIS assistant administrator for field operations.

Back in California, at about the same time the recall notice hit the streets, the two company employees implicated in the animal abuse were officially charged with animal cruelty and arrested. The two men had already lost their jobs as a result of the undercover video. Now, the manager must respond to five felony counts of animal cruelty and three associated misdemeanors, and his assistant faces three misdemeanor charges.

Meanwhile, the food safety system is under a microscope. Editorials calling for increased oversight and investigations are thick on the ground. Four Democratic lawmakers asked the Government Accountability Office to review the process for assessing the safety of food in the school lunch programs. And pending legislation that would keep downer cattle out of the food supply is receiving renewed interest both the House and the Senate.

But what impact will all this have on consumers? A recent Reuters story suggests not much of one. The beef-loving public is expected to "shrug off" the recall, though the unwavering demand, coupled with this sudden reduced supply, has prompted economists to project a slight price increase for beef.

But if you're a member of the public who wants to stay informed, USDA has created a Web page on which are collected the Department's official statements, press releases, technical briefings, transcripts and informational Q&As pertaining to the Westland Meat Company allegations and the associated beef recall. Or see InfoFarm's overview of how a recall works from last October for a quick look at the process now underway.

More will very likely be forthcoming about all this, but for now, we're both caught up on the news.

How has all of it impacted your feelings about eating beef? Or what, if anything, do you think should be done to improve the inspection process? We'd love to hear your thoughts, so feel free to comment below.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on February 21, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

It's quite scary having such a huge recall. Working in schoolfoodservice I would hope that better inspections will take place knowing what grand caos this kind of action can take. Personally it makes me think of how these producers are not following all the rules and what really does go on in the
slaughterhouses

Submitted by: Nancy on March 23, 2008 07:17 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Happy Birthday, Abe! | Main | eXtension Reaches Out >>

January 31, 2008

USDA Investigates Slaughterhouse

Cattle feeding on grain The U.S. Department of Agriculture has responded quickly and seriously to the video footage released yesterday showing workers at a California slaughterhouse using a variety of methods to get "downer" cattle to stand for a pre-slaughter inspection.

Secretary of Agriculture Ed Schafer included in his statement on the matter word that Westland Meat Company will be "indefinitely suspended ... as a supplier to Federal food and nutrition programs" while the Department fully investigates the allegations.

The Department also held a technical briefing on the situation this afternoon. The audio briefing, which runs just short of an hour, provides some background on the animal inspection process and offers details of the Department's plans for investigating the matter.

Federal regulations prohibit cattle unable to stand or walk on their own from entering the food supply. This standard serves as a safeguard against Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, or BSE.

To learn more about BSE, see the NAL resource page on the topic, or consult the Web sites on the welfare of farm animals pulled together by the Library's Animal Welfare Information Center.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on January 31, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This is the first I've looked at the InfoFarm. I think its a good idea. After looking at what's been posted my only comments are that I noticed how President Lincoln spoke (the style back in those days possibly)was quite different than today. Also, I finally see what is the problem with the beef recall.

Submitted by: David on February 19, 2008 12:48 PM

Has any info been released that showed "downers" infected with disease like BSE or is abuse the real story?

Submitted by: delta jim on February 19, 2008 07:34 PM

Delta Jim,

The videotaped abuse alerted USDA to the company's violations of both the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act and other Federal regulations that dictate how "downer" cattle are to be handled.

The beef recall then was issued because the Food Safety and Inspection Service determined the resulting beef products to be unfit for human food because the cattle did not receive complete and proper inspection.

The risk of illness from the meat is considered remote, however, because keeping downer cattle out of the food supply is only one measure in an interlocking system of controls the federal government has in place to protect the food supply.

In fact, no illnesses associated with the beef have been reported.

See the following USDA sources for more info:

Recall notice

BSE Control Measures Questions and Answers

Finally, let me just draw one thing out of that second resource: The prevalence of BSE in the United States is extremely low. Since June 1, 2004, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service has sampled more than 759,000 animals and, to date, only 2 animals have tested positive for the disease under the program.

Submitted by: Mary Ann on February 22, 2008 08:05 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Mr. Schafer Goes to Washington | Main | Need Something to Look Forward To? >>

January 28, 2008

Meat: Less, More or Just Right?

A steak and a bratwurst are impaled upon raised grilling forks Just a quick heads-up about a thought-provoking article from yesterday's New York Times titled "Rethinking the Meat-Guzzler."

At the time of this writing, it's still listed as the second-most e-mailed article off the Times' site. It has also kicked up some play across the blogosphere, most of it supporting the author's main thrust, that eating less meat would do us and the world some good.

But what do you think? Do we need to change our relationship to meat for the good of the planet? Or is there another way to understand the figures Bittman presents? Are we on the verge of a "sea change," as Bittman suggests, or just in the midst of a eating fad?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on January 28, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

I am surprised at the effects of the meat industry on carbon dioxide emissions and the consumption of grain. Why, then, aren't environmentalists focusing on the meat industry as much as they are on the transportation industry? Why, then, aren't those who decry ethanol for taking grain away from the food supply saying anything about using grain to feed livestock?

As with everything, I think moderation is in order. Eating meat isn't bad by itself, but being conscious about where it comes from and how it's raised (including what resources go into it) would go a long way to helping Americans re-think their meat habits. Hopefully it would result in more individuals choosing meat raised in a more sustainable fashion.

Submitted by: Cindy on February 5, 2008 11:30 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< You're Only as Young as You Feel | Main | Mr. Schafer Goes to Washington >>

January 18, 2008

Ag Words on the Growing Edge

Animals , Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade , Natural Resources & Environment , Plants and Crops

A blue ribbon As a follow-up to yesterday's entry on locavores, I wanted to quickly mention the other agriculturally related words that have recently been in the running for Word of the Year.

In 2005 Oxford gave the nod to "podcast," a decidedly non-agricultural word, but a technology the aggies have certainly taken advantage of, including the folks over at USDA's Economic Research Service and National Agricultural Statistics Service.

And among the runners-up that year we had "bird flu" and "trans fats," two very different but significant challenges to our health that ag researchers are addressing.

The following year was also big for agriculture and the environment. "Carbon neutral" took the top spot, encouraging all of us to reduce our carbon emissions and to then balance "our remaining emissions...by purchasing a carbon offset, paying to plant new trees or investing in 'green' technologies such as solar and wind power."

Then "CSA," community supported agriculture, occupied a key runner-up position, and -- who knows? -- maybe contributed to "locavore's" win in 2007 by building momentum in the "buy local" movement.

For the librarians in the audience, 2006 also brought us "DRM," digital rights management, a mere hop, skip and a jump from the copyright issues we discussed the other day.

Then, as noted earlier, "locavore" snagged Oxford's latest blue ribbon, but the mysterious "colony collapse disorder" made the list, as did "upcycling," a innovative alternative to waste disposal, one that puts a value-added spin on recycling.

So, not bad, nine words in three years related to agriculture, the environment, nutrition or librarianship. (I cast a wide net.)

But what did Oxford miss? Any other good, new agricultural words out there? Send 'em along or make 'em up. We're always ready to push that growing edge.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Plants and Crops on January 18, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Hello!
Nice site ;)
Bye

Submitted by: BersJonrete on January 20, 2008 12:26 AM

The "permalink" for this article does not work for some reason.

Submitted by: David Engel on January 23, 2008 09:57 AM

All fixed, David. Thanks for the heads-up!

Submitted by: Mary Ann on January 23, 2008 01:26 PM

Well, I have to vote for "coarse woody debris" to be my new favorite term for 2007, (but not surpassing "gubernaculum" or "logomachy"). Also known as CWD, this term was brought to my attention by the US Forest Service folks. If anyone knows about it, they do! So many terms, so little time.

Submitted by: Lori Finch on January 24, 2008 05:18 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Are You a Locavore? Should You Be? | Main | Made in the USA >>

January 17, 2008

Are You a Locavore? Should You Be?

Food and Nutrition , Marketing and Trade , Natural Resources & Environment , Plants and Crops

locavore (noun) 1 One who prefers to eat food grown or produced locally 2 Word of the Year So, do you consider yourself a locavore? If so, you're environmentally conscious and trendy, wearing a label declared the "Word of the Year 2007" by the New Oxford American Dictionary.

For those who've never heard the term, it was coined just a few years ago by Jessica Prentice, one of four women in San Francisco who set out to eat food grown or produced within 100 miles of their homes. They weren't the only ones doing so, but their word caught on, at least in some circles, and is now, as Oxford sees it, a "word to watch."

It has gotten a few amateur (maybe even professional) lexicographers in an uproar: Should it be "localvore," (with an "l")? Should it be "localtarian," to convey the choice implied (a la "vegetarian")? Should we even care?

Of course, the last question touches upon more than just the word, but on the choices and actions the word encompasses -- eating locally, supporting nearby farmers and producers, reducing the transportation and shipping costs associated with what we eat.

The payoff comes in terms both personal and global. The food I get from our neighborhood farmers' market is generally fresher and tastes better than the long-distance stuff. Even the meat is more flavorful. And I get all that while doing something positive for the environment.

Not so fast, interjects Sarah Murray. While buying locally might supply those benefits, "food miles" shouldn't be the sole factor taken into account when buying food. We must also consider harvesting and production methods, storage requirements, food packaging, and other steps along the road from farm to fork.

Murray cites the example of a British snack company that teamed up with the Carbon Trust to measure the carbon footprint of a bag of its potato crisps. In calculating the carbon dioxide emissions in the making and shipping of the crisps, they found that the troublespot was not transportation, but "storing and frying the potatoes." Making changes there, Murray points out, could reduce emissions more than constraining the miles the crisps travel to consumers.

Okay, sounds good. But what about the formula used for calculating a product's carbon footprint in the first place? What gets included? What doesn't? And how far down the growth and production chain do you go? As an article in The Economist points out, how you answer these questions significantly impacts your formula, and, of course, the results.

And taking a consumer's position on this, how will I know which formula is "right"?

Obviously, this carbon footprint stuff is tricky business, and the scientists will be hashing out the details for some time. Until then, though, until we see standards, I'll work with what I do know and buy locally as much as I can. I might never be a true locavore -- I like chocolate way too much for that -- but I'll do what I can, even if it does address just one factor in a lengthy environmental equation.

But what are you doing? Have you tried being a locavore, even on a short-term or seasonal basis? Do you grow your own herbs or veggies? Have you joined a community supported agriculture program? Are you a regular at the local farmers market? Let's hear your tips for reducing our individual carbon footprints.

Or offer your comments on our latest Word of the Year. Does "locavore" work for you? Got a better idea? Propose it here and you might find fame via your well-chosen neologism. Wouldn't that be cool?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Marketing and Trade and Natural Resources & Environment and Plants and Crops on January 17, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

I have started looking into this for myself. The task can sound simple at first, but in reality may require some research. I would have to cut many things from my diet like bread and beer because ALL the ingredients weren't grown within 100 miles of my home. Then again wine would still be available. The process of researching what does grow in your area opens up your mind to what really goes into producing food and getting it to your kitchen. And as we already know the food that's least processed is usually the best for you. So I think I can do without the potatoe crisps, but I draw the limit at giving up beer. It's a challenge that I want to take soon. I'd love to hear if anyone else does this, what their personal parameters were and how it went!

Submitted by: Virgie J on July 9, 2008 07:15 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Are Cloned Animals Safe to Eat? FDA Says "Yes" | Main | Ag Words on the Growing Edge >>

January 15, 2008

Are Cloned Animals Safe to Eat? FDA Says "Yes"

Annie, born March 3, 2000, is a clone of a pure-bred Jersey calf Oh, boy.

The new stories are flying, and I expect they'll soon to be followed by a flurry of op-ed pieces and blog postings.

On my morning tour through the news, I noticed that the Washington Post had broken the story on the Food and Drug Administration's approval of cloned animals for food consumption. The FDA hadn't even officially released its report yet, but the word was out that they'd found no evidence to ban or restrict meat or milk from cloned animals. The Post even included excerpts from the report.

Other news sources across the Web quickly picked up the story. In fact, each time I refreshed my search on Google News, I got more results. It would seem to be one of the day's hot topics. The New York Times is on it, as are Business Week, CNN and the Associated Press. Actually, by the time you read this, everyone might have picked this one up.

Overall, the stories summarize the FDA's report, explore the associated scientific and ethical concerns, and address the expected uproar from consumers if cloned meat and milk are allowed to sit -- unlabeled -- on store shelves with non-cloned meat.

Though all the articles convey the reasons behind the FDA's assessment and the food safety issues taken into consideration, so far, only the Baltimore Sun (that I've seen) has run a focused piece on the science behind the decision. "In Defense of Cloning" offers comments from a Unversity of Maryland professor who served as one of three animal scientists who reviewed the FDA's research. It's an informative read.

On the government side, I was about to write that neither the FDA nor USDA had release any public statement on the matter, but that's no longer true. In the last hour, both Departments posted press releases to their Web sites about the report and are providing links to more information about animal cloning and food safety.

If you'd like to learn more about cloning than USDA's Questions and Answers page can give you, I invite you to check out the books and articles on the topic here at NAL. And check back here at InfoFarm. I'll keep on eye on reactions to this story in the coming weeks and post key updates.

This one's gonna be interesting.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on January 15, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Do You Know Where Your Photos Are? | Main | Are You a Locavore? Should You Be? >>

January 03, 2008

A Plug for Nutrition

A sliced open grapefruit We all know that the year rolling over sets a lot of folks' minds toward self-improvement. I'm guessing that might be part of what inspired Nancy over at GovGab to consider her friend's obsessive consumption of grapefruits. Fortunately for us, that led her to delve into the great nuggets of info on Nutrition.gov, and she apparently liked what she saw:

For somebody who insists that banana bread counts as a serving of fruit and mint chocolate chip ice cream counts as a serving of vegetables because it's green, I have to admit, I really liked this site. From buying and preparing food to managing your weight to finding out nutrient values, the site has lots of great information.

Now, Nancy doesn't mention it, but Nutrition.gov hits the Web thanks to the work of my colleagues at the Food and Nutrition Information Center here at NAL.

Most of them are Registered Dietitians, so they know what they're doing when they're selecting the best sites on Weight Management or nutritional guidance for athletes, the elderly or vegetarians. (They're also great cooks, but you'll have to take my word for it on that one.)

So, thanks to GovGab for giving them their due. Please accept today's link love as an expression of my gratitude.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on January 03, 2008 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Nutrition.gov is one of many very useful government websites for those of us looking for health information and tools. Thanks for the information.

Submitted by: Jim Purdy on January 12, 2008 11:26 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Duck...Duck...Goose | Main | Cool Stuff for the Agricultural Autodidact >>

December 05, 2007

Six Important Updates You Don't Want to Miss

Animals , Emergency Response , Farm Bill , Food and Nutrition , History of Agriculture , Plants and Crops

A hand holds out a telephone receiver In just the last two days I've noticed how many of the stories I've addressed over the last two months continue to pop up in the news. Given that, I thought it'd be interesting to see how things have moved on a few of them, or what fresh angles more recent coverage offers.

So, without further ado, here are the updates you don't want to miss:

Since my October 15 entry on food recalls, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has issued a Food Protection Plan that seeks to identify potential foodborne hazards before they sicken or kill anyone, but the plan isn't impressing Congress. Members of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions have made some pretty strong statements indicating that neither it, nor the plan to enhance import safety, goes far enough.

The potato cyst nematode doesn't seem too interested in joining the Year of the Potato celebration. Instead, it's spoiling the party by spreading to its eighth field in Idaho, threatening crop production there.

Faster computers are accelerating the pace of discovery, but they're also making it possible to generate more realistic, more accurate and more powerful computer simulations. Such progress validates our October post on schools and industries moving away from using animals for education and experimentation.

Avocado farmers who have started to regroup after October's wildfires are learning that their crop insurance doesn't cover as much as they thought it would. And even those that can expect some payments might not see money until early 2009.

The farm bill has stalled on its way through the Senate, and there's really no telling where this one's gonna end up. Today word hit that U.S. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid would be filing a cloture motion this afternoon. Such a motion, if passed, would limit any further debate on the farm bill to 30 hours, but a similar attempt a few weeks ago failed to get the 60 votes required for passage.

"Sometimes it pays to read the old literature." So said Dr. Peter Palese, a researcher who determined why winter is flu season. And though I've not written a lick about the flu, I thought the lesson Dr. Palese offers to be a timely reminder that some ideas have been thunk before, which was, in fact, the main point behind the Starting Right with Turkeys entry. The Web holds valuable, historical stuff. Make use of it.

If you have more updates to add, feel free to send 'em along.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Emergency Response and Farm Bill and Food and Nutrition and History of Agriculture and Plants and Crops on December 05, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Seven Score and Six Years Ago Today | Main | Help for Hard Times >>

November 27, 2007

Outsmart Yourself and Lose

A woman tried to choose from among a variety of colorful fruits and vegetables A number of years ago I read an article tacked up to a bulletin board at the gym. It offered a fascinating look at how food variety -- even just perceived variety -- affected how much we ate. That is, faced with two equal-sized bowls of M&Ms, subjects ate more from the bowl with the multi-colored blend than from the bowl holding the single-colored candies, even though they all tasted the same.

The story stuck with me, probably because I'm a big fan of M&Ms, but I didn't really hold onto the name of the researcher who made the discovery. But then I glimpsed an article in USA Today about the appointment of Dr. Brian Wansink as head of the USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, and it all fell into place. Oh, I thought, that's who Brian Wansink is. My M&M guy. The "mindless eating" guy.

Wansink has been studying the psychology of eating for a while now and has found a range of external factors that lure us into eating more. Take the bones away as you eat, and you'll gobble down more chicken wings. Use a short, squat glass, rather than a tall, skinny one, and you'll pour more to drink. Keep snacks on your desk, and you'll reach for them more frequently than if they're across the room. Volume, variety, and convenience all contribute to our eating on autopilot.

The good news though is that we can use the visual trickery to our advantage. Put a rainbow of veggies on your plate to eat more of what you should be eating. Buy new glassware and eat from smaller plates. Keep fruit nearby instead of candy. These small changes can cut our overall caloric intake without us even noticing a change. The same psychology of eating that got us to eat more can get us to eat less -- or more of what's good for us.

Of course, I'm curious to see how Wansink applies all this at his new post developing the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans or enhancing MyPyramid.

I'm also curious to see if he'll continue his blog, FoodThink with Wansink, that has been around only since August. So far, it looks like he is -- four postings since last week's announcement (PDF | 24.5 KB) -- but interestingly, no mention of his new gig. (Though he did say he's scheduled to appear on The View today.)

And I'm curious if his Mindless Eating Challenge, put together with the the help of his colleagues at Cornell's Food and Brand Lab, can really cut unconscious eating.

What's your take? Have you tried any of Wansink's strategies? Have they worked for you? Let us know.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on November 27, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Getting Kids' Hands Dirty | Main | Help Stop the Emerald Ash Borer >>

November 20, 2007

A Thanksgiving Partnership

A whole pumpkin pie with dollop of whipped cream in the center In the fall of 1621, the Plymouth colonists and their Native American neighbors sat down to an autumn feast to celebrate a bountiful harvest.

Now, 386 years later, we still gather as best we can around a special meal. Whether that be turkey, ham or veggie meatloaf, whether you like raisins in your stuffing or marshmallows in your sweet potatoes, food still occupies a central place in Thanksgiving. (Football, you'll note, was added much, much later.)

Because of food's integral place in the holiday, this week has been declared National Farm-City Week to acknowledge and celebrate the partnership between urban and rural residents. It reminds us all of the mutual benefit this relationship provides: farmers and ranchers supplying our food, consumers buying what the farmers produce.

So, do your part. Get out there and eat! And while you're at it, give thanks to the folks who made it all possible by buying locally. You'll get fresher foods, and you'll get to know first-hand some of the folks who grow what you eat.

You can also learn more about the many ways you can partner with your local farmers through the Library's resources on community supported agriculture. Or get more info on National Farm-City Week from the National Farm-City Council, organizers for each year's national events.

And instead of the annual Turkey Bowl touch football game, why don't you challenge your friends and family to a friendly game of farm trivia? It's easier, cleaner and less likely to result in strained ligaments. Trust me on this one.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Plants and Crops on November 20, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Berry, Berry Interesting (or a Bog Blog) | Main | Starting Right with Turkeys >>

November 19, 2007

Berry, Berry Interesting (or a Bog Blog)

A man pushes cranberries through a flooded bog With Thanksgiving just a few days away, turkeys are getting a lot of air time, far more than their proverbial fifteen minutes. To balance the scales a bit, I'm going to spend today cruising you around the Web to learn about the simple but tasty cranberry.

According to the Cape Cod Cranberry Growers' Association, Native Americans knew about the cranberry long before the pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock, using the fruit for food, in dyes and as medicine.

Despite that, we have no evidence that cranberries were present at the Pilgrim's first Thanksgiving.

That shouldn't dimish the cranberry's importance, however. It is one of only three fruits native to North America that have commercial significance. (The other two are blueberries and concord grapes.) In fact, based on sales, the cranberry is growing in popularity in other parts of the world, thanks to a focused marketing effort overseas.

Did you know though that Massachusetts is not the leading producer of cranberries? That honor goes to Wisconsin, where cranberry production is forecasted to be 3.9 million barrels, about half the U.S. production totals. Massachusetts ranks second with 1.8 million barrels.

But don't erase that New England-cranberry connection just yet. The history and importance of the cranberry runs deep there. Cranberries were first cultivated in Dennis, Massachusetts in 1816, and the fruit has developed into Massachusetts' number one agricultural commodity crop. The state is also home to over half of the country's cranberry farms.

What about the flooded bogs? Those actually signal a wet harvest, in which the fruits' ability to float is exploited to simplify the process. (If you've got two minutes to spare, watch a video of a Wisconsin wet cranberry harvest on YouTube. It's pretty cool.) Cranberries can also be mechanically harvested dry. Fruit harvested wet heads for further processing; dry harvest is reserved for cranberries that will be sold fresh.

Good cranberries also bounce, another characteristic exploited for harvest. Soft, spoiled or damaged berries will not bounce, so they'll fall through the bounce boards and not make the cut.

Need to know more? Then take a look at these books and articles from the Library's catalog, AGRICOLA. Or bounce on over to The American Cranberry site, a great collection of cranberry-related resources pulled together by the University of Wisconsin-Madison, one of NAL's AgNIC partners.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Plants and Crops on November 19, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

National Geographic offers another video on the cranberry harvest which is a more polished, professional profile of one cranberry grower in Wisconsin.

Heads up though: you will get a brief commercial at the beginning. Of course no endorsement is intended.

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 21, 2007 10:16 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Happy Birthday, Oklahoma! | Main | A Thanksgiving Partnership >>

November 14, 2007

Are You One in 6.2 Million?

Logo for World Diabetes Day Being one in 6.2 million would make you rather special, but in this case, it'd be a dubious distinction, for that outrageous figure counts the number of undiagnosed cases of diabetes in the United States. That's undiagnosed.

Diagnosed cases more than double that, at 14.6 million. And the number is growing. The U.S. showed a 14% increase over the last two years alone.

The rest of the world is doing a little better, but only a little. Compared to our 7% of the population, the rest of the world shows an incidence rate of 5.9%, but don't let that apparently low figure fool you. That's still 246 million people. And like the U.S., the numbers are growing.

With that in mind, the United Nations declared today World Diabetes Day, the first such occasion meant to draw attention to the growing incidence of diabetes worldwide.

So do your part. Take a few minutes to learn the disease's warning signs and to assess your risk. Then commit yourself to eating better and exercising regularly, two things that have been shown to prevent or delay diabetes' onset.

The Library's Food and Nutrition Information Center has just what you need to get informed and get started, including how to keep your blood sugar levels under control.

Small steps can yield big rewards. And they can make you special at a grander scale than one in 6.2 million. They can keep you healthy, and what could be more special than that?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on November 14, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Squawk Back | Main | Dreaming of James Herriot >>

November 07, 2007

Now We're Squawkin'

A rooster boldly crows Take a moment and consider the number of chicken sandwiches served up by your local fast food joint on any given day. Multiply that by all the fast food joints in your town.

Now, think restaurants, diners, dinner theaters, caterers.

Then add in the rotisserie chickens at your local grocery, along with the packaged whole birds, the drumsticks and chicken thighs, and the frozen patties, nuggets and ready-strips.

Now, go national; multiply it all by 51 (allowing for the District of Columbia -- which, by the way, has more people than Wyoming, but that's another topic all together).

How many chickens do you figure that is?

According to the National Agricultural Statistics Service, the United States poultry industry produces nearly 9 billion chickens annually, which equals more than 48 billion pounds of meat. Sure, some of that is exported, but even allowing for that, we're still averaging well over 100 pounds of chicken per person. And that's not even taking out the vegetarian and vegan portion of the population, which would raise the figures for the rest of us.

I'm also not counting eggs.

Wow.

Obviously, the poultry industry has a huge impact on the U.S. economy. Production, processing, transportation, food service -- all derive benefits.

But nothing comes without a cost. Chicken's ascent to America's favorite meat has brought with it concerns about industrialization, pollution, food safety and animal rights. Even what constitutes "natural" is now up for debate.

Regardless of what side of the chicken coop you're on, there's always more to read and learn. You can start with the array of resources my colleagues have pulled together, including some original stuff for the poultry historians among you:

Animals and Livestock: Poultry and Eggs
Alternative Farming: Meat, Dairy and Eggs
Alternative Farming: Organic Lifestock
Animal Welfare: Poultry
Food Safety: Meat and Poultry HACCP
Food Safety: Avian Influenza
Natural Resources: Pollution, Waste Management and Conservation
Water Quality: Manure Management
Special Collections: American Poultry Historical Society Papers
NAL's Digital Repository: World's Poultry Congress (Select the title from the list for full-text of the proceedings.)

Of course, if you really just like chickens -- like to look at them, raise them, can't get enough of them -- then jump on over to the Washington Post for some "Cheep Thrills," a insiders' look at the ornamental poultry circuit and the folks that keep these beautiful breeds alive. And don't miss their photo gallery. Whatever you picture when you hear the word "chicken," I guarantee you these birds aren't it.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Animals and Food and Nutrition on November 07, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Great blog post!! Chickens rock, and all the cool people know it. I think everyone should be allowed to have a hen laying about, no matter where you live.

Check out www.henhutch.com. Even a city chicken deserves a chance!

Submitted by: Chicken Little on November 8, 2007 09:27 AM

Hello, my name is Gudvin, I like yours blog.

Submitted by: Gudvin on November 12, 2007 03:58 AM

I really had no idea that raising chickens in urban areas had become "a thing," but it's big enough that the New York Times carried a piece about the phenomenon back in September.

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 21, 2007 11:31 AM

This is a great resource. With the mass production of chickens it's impossible to treat them humanely and they have no protection at all under the law. I hope as animal rights groups gain momentum they will earn protection.

Vegan

Submitted by: Vegan on December 11, 2008 02:17 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Heard the Latest About the Farm Bill? | Main | Squawk Back >>

October 31, 2007

What's Really Scary this Halloween?

Halloween candy fills a plastic jack o'lantern The costumed kids hit the streets tonight. If you're ready for them, you've got multiple bags of chewies and chocolates waiting at home. Maybe some of you (like me) have already broken into the bags for a sample. A little quality control on behalf of the ghouls and goblins coming tonight. I honor your commitment. Really.

But after you read about the latest report issued by the American Institute for Cancer Research and the World Cancer Research Fund, you might want to step away from that chocolate bar.

The 517-page report – Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global Perspective -- finds stronger evidence than ever before linking cancer risk to excess body fat. Those findings emerged at the end of "a five-year process involving nine independent teams of scientists from around the world, hundreds of peer reviewers, and 21 international experts who reviewed and analyzed over 7,000 large-scale studies."

Did you catch that last part? This isn't just one study making the point, it's 7,000 of them.

So, what can you do?

The report provides ten recommendations for preventing cancer, but tops among them: maintaining a normal weight range and being physically active. The next six recommendations focus on dietary tips that will help with weight control, such as eating "mostly foods of plant origin" and limiting your intake of calorie-dense, sugary foods, red meat, alchoholic drinks and salt.

It's not stuff we haven't heard before, but this time it comes with that 7,000-report backing.

Fortunately, NAL and the USDA have compiled a host of Web sites and databases to help you get started -- or to keep your good habits on track. Here are just a few:

Food and Nutrition Information Center
MyPyramid.gov, including the very cool MyPyramid Tracker
Nutrition.gov

But before you click off, repeat after me, "Portion control. Exercise. Fruits and veggies. Oh, my!"

Nothing too scary about those, right?

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition on October 31, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Mary Ann -

OK, Thanks again, for another fine post (albeit late in my review). It's really incredible how much information is there to help us make the best choices we are able. Ah, the human condition(s), and our work to master and control them, :)/:(.

Submitted by: Anonymous on November 10, 2007 09:02 PM

That is really scary. But the health of effects of the obesity have long been known by common sense if not science. There are a lot of plus size costumes in the world these days.

Submitted by: Robert Smitty on November 29, 2007 08:00 PM

I have worked in environmental and human health risk assessment and groundwater protection. It's not a pretty picture sometimes what happens as a result of intensive food production and processing.
+++++++++++++
mercy

Submitted by: mercy on December 16, 2008 04:03 AM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< Cultivating Safety on Farms and Ranches | Main | The Flower Itself Entered Our World >>

October 23, 2007

Praise the Tater

Two potatoes In my effort to keep myself -- and you -- well-informed, I scour various news sources, check up-to-the-minute Web sites and talk with people in the know. Despite all of that though, one bit of news slipped passed me last week: October 18 marked the official beginning of the International Year of the Potato 2008.

Now, I don't know why Spud '08 began in mid-October '07, but let's push that aside and look instead at what this year's all about, namely, "raising awareness of the importance of the potato...in addressing issues of global concern, including hunger, poverty and threats to the environment."

'Tis true. The humble potato has been a staple in human diets since it was first consumed in the Andean highlands 8,000 years ago. It requires less land to grow than most other major crops and can flourish in a variety of climates. It provides a hefty dose of vitamin C and other nutrients to go with the carbohydrates it conveys. It's also mighty tasty, with a variety of ways it can be prepared. Together, these characteristics make it an almost perfect weapon against hunger and malnutrition.

Face it, the potato does rule.

And, Year of the Potato or not, it gets a lot of attention. Researchers work to develop improved varieties or control potato-damaging pests. Economists study its significance and production trends. Nutritionists are all over its health benefits. And on the lighter side, the Potato Museum pays King Tater enthusiastic homage for its versatility and importance.

The American poet Richard Wilbur captured all this, the crucial vitality wrapped in ordinariness, in his 1947 poem "Potato":

"It was potatoes saved us, they kept us alive."
Then they had something to say akin to praise
For the mean earth-apples, too common to cherish or steal.
Full poem

The message: don't be fooled by its plain exterior. The potato is a complex, priceless thing, well worthy of its own year (or fifteen months, as the case may be).

So let's talk taters. Drop us a note, ask a question or share a recipe.

Or if you're more of a mouse potato, move on over to NAL's Food and Nutrition Information Center for a fistful of high-quality potato-related links.

Either way, let's kick off the International Year of the Potato 2008 together. We can really mash things up. (Yea, um, sorry. Couldn't resist.)

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Food and Nutrition and Plants and Crops on October 23, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

What about it's cousin: the sweet potato? How many varieties of spud are there anyhow?

Submitted by: i love spuds on October 23, 2007 08:16 PM

Great article. Just wanted to join the convo. I found this amusing.

From WhatsCookingAmerica.net:

1597 - John Gerard (1545-1612), an British author, avid gardner, and collector of rare plants, received roots of the plant from Virginia where he was able to successfully grow it in his own garden. He wrote in his book The herball, the following about the potato:

"Potatoes of the Virginia. The potato of the Virginia has many coppers flexible cables and that crawl for earth... The root is thick, large and tuberosa; not much various one for shape, color and sapore from common potatoes (the sweet potatoes) but a smaller Pò; some are round as spheres, other ovals; the some longer other shortest ones... It grows spontaneously in America where, as Clusius has reported, it has been discovered; from then I have received these roots from the Virginia otherwise Norembega calls; they grow and they prosper in my garden like in their country of origin... Its correct name is cited in the title it. Poichè it possesses not only the shape and the proportions of potatoes, but also their gradevole sapore and virtue we can call them potatoes of the America or Virginia."

Submitted by: Michelle L. on October 24, 2007 08:01 AM

Hey, i love spuds! Thanks for the question -- and for a name that can't help but support the International Year of the Potato.

The short answer to your question is that there are thousands of varieties of potatoes. The European Cultivated Potato Database currently lists 4,119 varieties, mostly in Europe but some from South America, Asia, Australia and Africa.

The Year of the Potato site also mentions "thousands of varieties," with the specific note that "more than 5,000 native varieties [are] still grown in the Andes."

Note, however, that the sweet potato is not one of these thousands. This other tuber is actually a distant cousin of the potato, with each a part of a different genus.

Potato: Solanum tuberosum
Sweet Potato: Ipomoea batatas

Submitted by: Mary Ann on October 24, 2007 09:31 AM

Michelle,

The excerpt from John Gerard's work that you include reminds us (a) of how much language has changed in a few hundred years; and (b) that the origins of the potato have been commonly misunderstood.

The History of the Potato page from within the WhatsCookingAmerica site actually provides an interesting overview of how the potato has criss-crossed the Atlantic a time or two. Folks didn't always know what to do with it initially, but it hung on and became the staple it is today.

Submitted by: Mary Ann on October 24, 2007 09:53 AM

I came from Idaho so, this is a topic that strikes a cord. A question I have is actually about insect control using Beneficial nematodes. In the area I live in, I was wondering if these same Beneficial nematodes are bad for Cotton as well as Potato crops. There are many great garden and lawn sites that sell the Beneficial nematodes for insect control without pesticides - This would seem to be an issue for Cotton or Potatos - I seem to recall nematodes being bad for Taters. ;)

Anyone want to field that question for me?

Submitted by: Tim on October 26, 2007 11:45 AM

I was truly surprised to hear that it was the Year of the potato. Being born & raised in the "potato state"; this was the first I had heard of it. Hopefully we'll hear more before it is over.

Submitted by: toni on October 26, 2007 12:58 PM

Toni--
so you're from Maine, then?
:-)

Submitted by: mike on October 31, 2007 10:29 AM

Tim,

Nematodes are unsegmented, usually microscopic roundworms from the phylum Nematoda. There are approximately 20,000 different species of nematodes. Many species can cause disease in plants, animals and humans, while others have proven beneficial by killing insect pests.

Nematodes from the genera Steinernema and Heterorhabiditis are bred and sold as beneficial nematodes.

A successful insect control program requires applying the appropriate nematode species to the appropriate insect pest. In short, you can not use just any beneficial nematode.

My search of research literature indicates that there are no beneficial nematodes for controlling insect pests in potato or cotton crops. In fact, there are a number of nematodes responsible for causing an assortment of diseases in potato and cotton crops.

Sources:

Carol A. Miles, Blethen C., and Gaugler, R. "Using Beneficial Nematodes for Crop Insect Pest Control." Agrichemical and Environmental News, vol.180; April, 2001.

Catherine R. Weeden, Shelton, AM, and Hoffman, MP. Biological Controls: A Guide to Natural Enemies in North America.

University of Lincoln Nebraska. What Are Nematodes?

Should you have any further questions, please contact the Library.

Submitted by: AgRef on November 20, 2007 08:53 AM

And since we're on the topic of nematodes and taters, check out a fairly recent article from Agricultural Research magazine on a new race of golden nematodes, one that attacks potato plants that had been resistant to the previous race.

Submitted by: Mary Ann on November 20, 2007 03:39 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< The Man Who Fed the World | Main | Move Over, Rover >>

October 18, 2007

No Rotten Tomatoes for this Guy

Biography , Food and Nutrition

Three red tomatoes Have you ever heard of the World Food Prize? It honors those "who have advanced human development by improving the quality, quantity or availability of food in the world." Given this lofty intent, it is considered by many the Nobel Prize for agriculture.

Of course, if you agree with the basic premise in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs -- that the physiological drive for food, water, shelter, etc. must be satisfied before any higher level needs can be fully pursued -- then you could even argue that the World Food Prize is more important than the Nobel Prizes, just with less press coverage.

Until now.

This blog has uttered nary a word about those other awards in Sweden, but we're devoting today's entry to the World Food Prize and this year's honoree, Dr. Philip Nelson.

The first food scientist to win the award -- all previous honorees came from the food production side -- Dr. Nelson grew from a 15-year-old 4-H "Tomato King" in Indiana to an internationally recognized expert in food science and technology thanks to his development of asceptic equipment and processing methods. This asceptic processing allows tomatoes, oranges and other fruits and vegetables to be held in a pathogen-free environment well beyond harvest without loss of taste or nutritional value. It also removes the element of time from food distribution and processing, making it possible to distribute seasonal foods around the world safely and economically.

Think fresh orange juice in Sweden in July, a half a year and a half a world away from its Florida harvest.

So, consumers have more choices, food stays fresher longer, and products can be imported and exported with limited loss. And the processing and packaging Dr. Nelson developed has improved the reach and effectiveness of humanitarian food programs as well. Even those in the remotest regions of the world feel his impact.

His work has not gone unnoticed. Obviously. The Institute of Food Technologists rated aseptic processing and packaging the No. 1 innovation in food technology back in 1991. Then in '95 he received IFT's prestigious Nicholas Appert Award, and now, the World Food Prize.

So, a hearty congratulations and thank you to Dr. Nelson, who will receive his award tonight at the Iowa State Capitol in Des Moines.

And for those of you who aspire to join him one day, peruse the valuable resources collected by NAL's Food Safety Research Information Office, including their Research Projects Database.

Or take a few minutes to tell us what you think is the the most important innovation in food technology. Maybe together we can pinpoint next year's World Food Prize winner.

Posted by Mary Ann Leonard

Added to Biography and Food and Nutrition on October 18, 2007 EST | Permalink

Share your comments

Nicely done, MA! Thanks very much!

Submitted by: Karl S on October 22, 2007 04:26 PM

This blog does not represent official communications from the National Agricultural Library, the Agricultural Research Service or the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

<< What Does Horticulture Have to do with Baseball? | Main | The Man Who Fed the World >>

October 15, 2007

How Food Recalls Work