Search this Site

Friday, April 23, 2010

Question: Does running a ceiling fan at lower speed decrease power usage?

This is not a biology question - more on to Physics - however of scientific interest

A question for which I have been getting conflicting answers on the web: would someone be able to provide a mathematical proof - in terms of calculations?

Most ceiling fans in India have a regulator (two types - a resistance based one and an electronic one) which controls the speed of the fan.  I have all across believed that running a fan at a lower speed takes up more energy as a good amount is wasted in the regulator (resistance-based) in the form of heat.  But some argue otherwise.

Does someone have a mathematical proof for this - either than it saves energy or it does not?  breaking the answer for Resistance based and electronic one too is fine...
TIA...


I did a small experiment a few days back - the power went out and the UPS kicked in.  I switched off all the lights and fans and then switched on 4 fans at low speed.  The 500W capacity UPS showed 50% load when the 4th fan was switched on.  Then I switched off 2 fans and the load dropped back to 25%.  I then gradually increased the speed of the fans. When both the fans were at their top speed, the load kicked back to 50% - which at an initial level goes on to prove that running a fan at lower speed is sure to take lower load and use lower power.  However, I have the small socket type (electronic) regulators at home.  I am not sure if the same holds true for resistance type regulator.  So if someone has started a research on this, please continue.

Monday, April 19, 2010

India's political food policy and impact on local agriculture

A look at India's food policy with recent additions like Right to Food Acts and so on seem more like political ploys in the hands of the rich policians to exploit the poor farmers.  On one side they seem to say that they would make food available at affordable rates the poorest of the poor.  On the other side, they strive to change the food habits of people so that they are dependent on Government aid.

Take the following example.  When the government is proposing 25 Kgs of food to the poor at a subsidized price, they seem to be talking of Wheat in the northern states and rice in the southern states.  There seems to be no other food grain in their description.

However, if you look at it, traditionally a lot of states consumed the so-called “coarse grain” for ages.  The government is now replacing that with Rice or wheat.  Let us look at the impact.

The government providing these grains would seem more like these grains are superior.  There is a higher demand for these and the prices would rise still more.  A higher price and demand would push the farmers to cultivate more of these crops.  The area under cultivation for coarse grains would go down further leading to the coarse grains becoming equally costly and unavailable.  Since the traditional sources are no longer available, the poor would shift to consuming rice and wheat.

Look at the irony of the entire thing.  Some of the coarse grains are nutritionally superior to rice.  For example, ragi and jowar are more complex carbohydrates and have a greater amount of protein and vitamins in them that the PROCESSED rice which is shelled out by the PDS.  Not only that, from a nutritional point of view, rice is only a source of carbohydrates.  The government's policy on Pulses is unclear.  So consuming only rice might provide the energy requirements but will not satisfy the nutritional needs.

With dwindling forests and no solid afforestation schemes in place, the tribal areas are losing their natural source of nutrition from the forests and becoming increasingly dependent on the sources provided by the government.

Till the Government looks at alternative sources of grain and acknowledges their importance in food policy, it will be tough for the government to rein in prices and at the same time provide nutrition to its people.

But the question remains, is there a political will to really make the people self-sufficient in nutrition?  Once that comes, what would be the alternatives for the political parties to include in their agendas once in five years?  Have not successive governments kept people poor by promises and dreams? 

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

Why Para-boiled milled rice is better than Raw milled Rice

A large population of South India are typically rice consumers.  Most of the rice is produced in South India too.  About 20 years back, the rural parts in some areas in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka used to depend on other sources of cereals like Jowar and Maize of different varieties.  However, of late, with change in economic conditions and food “Perception” that rice is a superior crop (with respect to social status), there has been a considerable shift in the food preferences, with a majority moving on to rice.  One reason could be that rice has been traditionally sold at a higher price than the remaining cereals and successive governments have promoted rice cultivation (for reasons only known to them).

There is nothing wrong with this trend.  Rice too is a rich source of carbohydrate.  However, the carbohydrate in rice is easier to digest than the carbohydrate in Jowar and Maize.  So for a sedentary life-style, rice was a better alternative.  For physically intensive labour, Jowar and Maize have been better suited.  However, the preference has been towards rice ( and wheat).

Coming back to our main point – rice comes in two varieties to the constomers – Raw Milled and Para-boiled.

The raw milled rice is what is obtained by running the raw grain of paddy, in which the rice is enclosed (with the HUSK) through rollers.  This separates the husk from the inner seed.  The higher the processing, the whiter the rice appears and the thinner it gets. And for some reasons in the past, the perception has been - “the whiter the rice, the better it is”  In a lot of cases, this led to loss of nutritious bran (which has most of the B-vitamin that rice had to offer).  In the Northern parts of India (and now in the South too), there is an additional perception that the thinner the grain, the better is the quality in terms of “poshness” (e.g., long grained, thin Baasmati rice).

The Para-boiled rice (as far as I know) is prepared by first boiling the paddy seeds and then milled and processing it like rice above.  

However, preferences in different states have been different with respect to how much is the processing required for para-boiled rice.  Para-boiled rice is generally thicker, more off-white tending to red (the color or the bran).  It also takes longer to boil and has a different (not very sweet) smell during the boiling process.  The states of Kerala and Tamil Nadu prefer the para-boiled rice while the states of Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh (at the time of writing, there was a proposal to break this into three states) prefer the Raw milled rice.  One of the reason for this preference was an old social structure – not sure how true this is.  When there was a strict adherence to the four varnas of Brahmin, Kshetriya, Vaisya and Shudra, the Brahmins refused to eat food “Cooked” by other varnas.  It was however OK to eat the produce from the fields cultivated by the other castes.  So since it was difficult to ascertain who boiled the grain used for the para-boiled rice, the brahmins decided to stick to raw rice.  It was not milled then.  The women folk would pound the paddy and then separate the husk.  Then there is another round of pounding to remove the bran.  Many of these practices have died down with time and mechanization.

Overall, in a lot of places, there is the preference for raw milled rice.  And typically, raw milled rice is costlier than the para-boiled variety.

However, from the view of the overall nutrient constituents, para-boiled rice is better.

The following are some of the nutritional values of one variety of milled raw and paraboiled rice.

Constituents per 100 grams of rice*




Ingredient

Units

Para-boiled Milled

Raw Milled




Moisture

grams

13.3

13.7




Protein

grams

6.4

6.8




Fat

grams

0.4

0.5




Minerals

grams

0.7

0.6




Fibre

grams

0.2

0.2




Carbohydrate

grams

79

78.2




Energy

Kcals

346

345




Calcium

milligrams

9

10




Phosphorus

milligrams

143

160




Iron

milligrams

1

0.7




Carotene

micrograms

0

0




Thiamine

micrograms

0.21

0.06




Riboflavin

micrograms

0.05

0.06




Niacin

micrograms

3.8

1.9




Total B6 in mg.

micrograms

0.24

0




Folic Acid

micrograms










Free

micrograms

8.9

4.1




Total

micrograms

11

8




Vitamin C

micrograms

0

0




Colene

micrograms

0

0

From a cursory look, it does not seem to have much difference.  But note that the small differences are big when taken in large quantities.  Differences in 100 gms might not mean much.  Think of the difference in 1 Kilogram or 20 Kgs over one month.

* Source: Printed Book: Nutritive Value of India Foods by C.Gopalan, B.V.Rama Sastri and S.C.Balasubramanian; Revised and updated by B.S.Narasinga Rao, Y.G.Deosthale and K.C.Pant.  Published by National Institute of Nutrition, Indian Council of Medical Research, Hyderabad – 500007; Reprinted in 2000; (there could be a newer version with more updated information).  The author studied at National Institute of Nutrition during the year 2001

Tuesday, April 6, 2010

Of Genetically Modified Foods

The basic principle governing genetic engineering is that genetic material which is also known as DNA can be transferred from a cell of one species to another unrelated species and made to express itself in the recipient cells.  This is also known as recombinant DNA Technology.

Mother nature is the first genetic engineer who has been experimenting on newer and newer life forms over billions of years.  We have only very recently started modifying the genes, which are the ultimate code of life.  There are innumerable instances where we have successfully applied the techniques of genetic engineering.  For example, scientists have now identified defective genes that cause diabetes and in the years to come, genetic engineering may offer simpler solutions to treat diabetes instead of life long treatment usage.  In the last decade, genes from bacteria or viruses have been inserted into DNA or genome of the host crop so that it develops better resistance to diseases.  This idea gave rise to several genetically modified crops which are presently invading the global market.

Genetic engineering knows no boundaries.  The genes of one species can be conveniently introduced into the other species with a definite purpose.  In most cases, these experiments are carried out for positive results, either to increase the yields of crops or to promote better health. However, doubts are being raised over the very process of experimentation.

The promise of gene technology is the stuff that science fiction is made of: Bananas that vaccinate a child against measles; maize that can grow in Africa's patched soils and survive drought conditions, or even an orange that can prevent cancer - all these are the possibilities in genetic engineering. The aim of this new technology is to give the recipient species a new trait such as the ability to resist herbicides and pesticides, or to grow in abnormal climates like the deserts of Africa.  Scientific Think-Tanks involved with biotechnology giants of the world are poised to surprise the world with many such experiments in the years to come.

Proponents of genetically modified foods, including many agricultural and nutrition scientists, are of the opinion that GM foods could help fight hunger and malnutrition.  Several other scientists, environmentalists and consumer activists opposing this technology opine that GM foods will destroy the environment, make people sick and hand over the control of world's food production to the hands of a few multinational corporations.  The critics say that GM foods have been channeled into the food chain at a pace that has outstripped the ability of governments to either regulate them or address the concerns of opponents.  And this according to them means that one of the most important ecological safeguards to protect the environment and enforce our constitutional rights has been sacrificed in favour of expediting the application of this technology.

Cultivation of GM food crops

In the last century, a variety of different breeding approaches have been used to improve crop production and quality, but it was not until the early 1980s that a new and powerful technology, “genetic modification”, was developed. This technology had not only transformed the agricultural industry but had also created a gulf between companies wanting to exploit the new technologies and critics who believe that GM foods are inherently unsafe to both environment and public health.

The first ever transgenic crop was produced in 1983 followed by the first outdoor field trials in 1987.  The first GM plant commercialized in China in 1992 was a virus-resistant tobacco plant which was followed two years later by the first GM plant (tomato-based) food product.  By 1996, 23 GM crops in US, 12 in Canada and 7 in Japan, had been approved for commercial production. North America is an example of excellent market for GM crops.  In 1996, it started with growing GM crops on only 2 million hectares (ha). increasing to 8.1 million ha in 1997 and to 20.5 million ha in 1998.

Advantages

GM technology is preferred to traditional breeding techniques as it is much faster and cheaper and allows a greater precision in selecting desirable characteristics.  Some of the important benefits of this technology are:

  • Pest resistance: A gene that naturally occurs in the said bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), produces an insecticidal protein that interferes with the ion transport system, disrupting an insect's ability to feed.  Plants carrying the inserted Bt gene are able to produce Bt protein protecting themselves against targeted pests.  In addition to requiring less insecticide for effective protection, the modified crops possesses improved yield and quality traits.

  • Herbicide tolerance: These modified crops provide farmers with greater flexibility in herbicide use and reduce or eliminate the need for pre-emergent soil applications.  The first genetically modified soy product has been already commercialized and products relating to cotton, corn, sugar beet and oilseed rape are currently under development.

  • Virus resistance: China was the first country to commercialize virus resistant transgenic crops with the introduction of virus resistant tobacco in 1992.

  • Improved quality: Delaying the onset of ripening by suppressing polygalacturonase, the cell-wall degrading enzyme in tomatoes, allows the fruit to stay on the shelf for longer duration and develop a better flavour and colour.

  • Nutritional improvement: Attempt to incorporate specialty oils, carbohydrates, proteins and other value ingredients into common crops have also been tried with some success.  Most of the research was carried out on edible oil modification and several GM crops have been developed with improved quality.  Genetic modification of oilseeds resulted in products yielding high oleic acid (18:1) low linolenic acid (18:3) increased lauric acids and larger yields of many edible oils. Canola oil with high lauric acid content, soy beans with high olelc acid, β-carotene and iron-rich rice variety, rape seed oil with low levels of saturated fatty acids are some examples in the case.
Apart from increasing the nutritional quality, genetic modification is also used to prepare high stability oils which contain high oleic acid content. These high stability oils can be prepared without chemical treatment, by eliminating trans-fatty acids and by improving the actual oxidative stability without the addition of tocopherols.

  • Adaptation to harsh conditions: Genetic modification can help the crops to grow in harsh conditions like drought, temperature extremes and soils with high salt content.

  • Seed proteins: Soybean and canola seed storage proteins are deficient in methionine. Scientists have taken a gene from Brazil nut that encodes a 2s storage protein with a methionine content of 18% and introduced it by transformation into canola. It led to an increase in net content of seed meal by more than thirty percent.  However, search is on for a better alternative to Brazil nut as there are certain problems in its usage.

  • Breakthrough in the development of Neurotoxin-free Lathyrus sativusL.sativus, a grain legume, has a unique feature of tolerance to drought and flood conditions.  Its cultivation is banned because of the presence of a toxin, BOAA. This toxin causes a neurological disease called Lathyrism. This gene has been isolated from Pseudomonas strains which can effectively degrade the BOAA toxin and render the pulse harmless for human consumption.

Issues of concern

There have been various concerns highlighted in recent years regarding the safety of GM foods. Many of these worries are speculative with little or no scientific evidence to back them up, while a few have created wide debates among scientists and general public. These main concerns include antibiotic resistance, allergenicity, potential toxicity and environmental issues.

Antibiotic resistance

Antibiotic “marker gene” are commonly used to trace the gene transfers. All genetically engineered products have antibiotic marker genes. After GM food is absorbed into the human digestive tract, these antibiotic genes could move from what we have eaten into the blood stream or into the bacteria harbouring the intestine. Such transfers might affect our health directly or affect the symbiotic relationship between us and the intestinal flora.  Consequently, we may develop resistance to several antibiotic drugs leading to a major public health problem.
But a major concern is whether the transfer of antibiotic resistance (trait) from a marker gene in plants to a micro-organism naturally present in the human gut or harmful bacteria is possible.  Currently, there are two examples where clinically important antibiotics have been used as a marker system in crops. The first is a maize variety that contains a gene for ampicillin resistance and the second is a potato variety that contains a gene for amikacin resistance.  Although this has not been demonstrated experimentally, any risk, no matter how small, of spreading resistance to therapeutic antibiotics should be avoided.

The UK's ACNFP (Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes) in the absence of reliable data, has erred on the side of caution and has recommended that Antibiotic Resistant Marker (ARM) genes should be eliminated from GM microorganisms which have not been inactivated by processing, for example, bioactive yoghurts.  However, a recent attempt by ACNFP to ban an unprocessed animal feed produced from GM cotton seed containing an ARM was overturned at the European level by Scientific Committee for plants.

Allergenicity

Another public health concern over human consumption of GM foods is that some percentage of the public may be allergic to a protein coded by the gene introduced into GM food.  Allergic reactions can either he extremely mild or quite dangerous.  According to one estimate, the past decade has seen a 300% increase tn allergies around the world.  Exposure to new foods can reveal new allergies and the combination of genetic material can lead to “cross-allergenicity”, where people allergic to one thing may be allergic to the genetic material that has been added to an item they once ate safely.  It means to say that if a person is not normally allergic to potato but say to brinjal and if a gene of brinjal is inserted into the genome of the potato, then the person eating that modified potato may also develop allergy to potato.  In the present scenario, consumers with certain food allergies would not be able to decide whether to choose or to avoid GM foods.  So, the present demand is for labeling of GM foods in which the details pertaining to the organism used for modification are also furnished.

Potential toxicity

The possible production of toxic compounds in GM foods or the production of harmful metabolites from GM fermentation microorganisms is another concern. An example of this scenario is demonstrated by the research conducted involving inserting of lectins into potatoes.  Lectins, a complex plant protein, are inserted into plants as a means of enhancing pest resistance, but when inserted into potatoes, they were shown to have an adverse effects on rats during feeding trials. However, it was later found by scrutinizing agencies that the experiments were poorly designed.

Environmental concern

Past experiences with the introduction of new species into the environment have already demonstrated that potential problems do not manifest themselves immediately but take several generations to become apparent.  There are fears of genetic drift, where, for example pollen from one kind of plant is taken up by another plant.  Similarly, genetically engineered traits such as herbicide-resistance may spread to weeds leading to the creation of indestructible weeds immune to herbicides.
For example, in April 1999, the UK's National Institute of Agricultural Botany, reported that a hybrid superweed may have been created after some GM canola pollen was taken up by wild turnips. These turnips subsequently showed resistance to the herbicide to which canola was made to be resistant through genetic engineering.
It has been suggested that the adoption of insect-resistant crops will disrupt the food chain and lead to the extinction of insect species thereby reducing biodiversity. There is also the potential problem of cross contamination from GM crops to non-GM crops resulting in a loss of authenticity for organic farmers, who will no longer be able to classify their products as 'organic'.

Legislations and labeling requirements

The concept of labeling is based on the condition that if providing a new food is substantially equivalent to an existing food or component then it can be treated in the same way with respect to both its safety and nutritional characteristics.  Therefore the acceptability of a GM food is determined by its comparison with an analogous conventional food in terms of composition, toxin and allergen content nutritional properties, metabolic fate and intended use.
Despite many people considering the use of substantial equivalence as an insufficient means for regulatory control of GM foods, many countries including Canada and the US, still rely on it.  However in UK, the concept of substantial equivalence was redefined in December 1997.  Only highly processed food products derived from GM crops such as white sugar and hydrolysates, which are unlikely to contain DNA or protein, are considered substantially equivalent to their counterparts, while all other ingredients derived from GM crops such as flour and protein require a full safety evaluation.

The food labeling laws are different in different countries.  The European Union argues that any food containing detectable amounts of GM ingredient should be labeled as such.  Some countries such as India, Norway and Denmark have gone a step further and called for all foods produced using GM technology, regardless of the presence of GM ingredients in the final product, to be labeled accordingly.

In contrast, US argues that this is not only unnecessary, costly and complicated, especially if ingredients are taken from a number of sources but that it also implies that GM technology is inherently unsafe when there is no direct evidence to substantiate such a conclusion.  However the US argument fails to address two important issues which are the need for public acceptance of GM technology and more importantly to allow consumers their fundamental right of choice.  In fact, the outcry against GM foods did not start until it became public knowledge that GM soy was being mixed with non GM soy in America and exported to Europe, where around 60% of processed foods contain soy protein.

Analytical methods for detection and quantitation of GM foods are basically needed for the food labeling laws and for the food safety evaluation.

Some of the methods which are now being used include Immuno assay, PCR analysis and Antibody based lateral flow test strips.

Out of these, immuno assay is more simple and PCR analysis is more sensitive.  By using these techniques, we can also detect the percentage of genetic modification present in the crops.

What does the future hold?

Rapid strides are bound to be made in the field of GM foods in the coming years.  These areas include:

Plant Biotechnology

In future, Plant Biotechnology might help us to grow : 

  • environmentally hardy food-producing plants that are naturally resistant to pests and diseases and are capable of growing under extreme conditions of temperature, moisture and salinity

  • fresh fruits and vegetables with excellent flavour, appealing texture and optimum nutritional content, that stay fresh for several weeks.

  • custom designed plants with defined structural and functional properties for specific food processing applications.

The diet-health interface

It will be possible to get

  1. engineered meat with reduced saturated fat or eggs with decreased cholesterol

  2. milk with improved calcium bio-availability, and

  3. cereal grains with increased levels of specific components that mitigate or even prevent diseases viz. soluble or insoluble fiber, omega 3 fatty acids, beta carotene or selenium.

Food-grade micro-organisms

In future, biotechnology might hold for us in a way that

  • Cultures are programmed to express or shut off certain genes at specific times during fermentation in response to environmental triggers.

  • Strains engineered to serve as delivery systems for digestive enzymes for individuals with reduced digestive capacity.

  • Microbially derived high value, natural food ingredients with unique functional properties

Conclusion

Despite the global trend in growth, there has been substantial resistance to GM technology in Europe, where currently there are no GM crops licensed for either commercial production or consumption.  Presently, there are no GM crops cultivated commercially in the UK and it is unlikely that there will be until near future.  In fact, UK has only 4 GM foods that have gained full approval and are in commercial use.  These include cheese produced with a GM chymosin, tomato paste produced from slow softening tomato, GM soy and GM maize.

Despite many advantages genetic engineering can offer to food industry, public concern regarding this technology still remains high throughout Europe, although attitudes towards accepting it have improved in America and Asia.  Many argue that labeling all foods produced by GM technology is the only way forward to regain the support and trust of consumers.  Perhaps, this is a small price to pay if this technology is to make an impact in the 21st century.  However, one thing is certain and that is if this technology is to succeed, the preferences and requirements of the consumers need to be addressed by governments, scientists and Industries alike.

References and sources:
This article has been collated from print material (magazines and publications) and internet resources which were not noted at the time of writing.

Friday, April 2, 2010

Pathway Curation: An Upcoming Area in Bioinformatics

With the current boom in information technology, we see its application in almost every aspect of our life. “Bioinformatics” is the subject, which deals with the application of information technology in the field of biology, for example usage of computing power for drug designing, protein modeling, sequencing genomes and proteins and so on. Pathway curation is one branch/part of bioinformatics. A pathway is a representation of a set of related reactions in a given context, i.e. glycolysis, Krebs cycle or apoptosis[1].

Because of extensive research, with tools like High-throughput genomics and DNA microarrays, researchers have accumulated high volumes of data that are often too large for manual assessment. Mathematical and statistical analysis can be done to structure the large data volumes. Based on various computational algorithms, the tool generates pathways along with pictorial representations for easy understanding.

Significant biological reactions are more lucid when projected on pathway diagrams rather than being represented in the form of a large set of tabular data. Generally a biological pathway diagram is used to describe molecular biology processes in a graphical way.

This new area of pathway representation has created the role of a “Biocurator”.

Biocurators (also called scientific curators, data curators or annotators) are also recognized as the "museum catalogers of the Internet age". As a Biocurator He/She should be able to capture and integrate the knowledge from various sources such as databases and scientific literature into a pathway. The Biocurator should also support the data with relevant annotations and make this scientific data accessible to the scientific community.

Multiple programs should be able to access the pathway diagrams and information in a sharable format to facilitate its use in research tool. Apart from this in a pathway diagram the pathway entities (like proteins, small molecules, lipid molecules etc) and the relation between the entities have to be made explicit. To make a pathway user friendly various proteins/metabolites involved in the pathway should be connected to a database entry. This entry should be linked to the experimental evidence from scientific literature which details about the function and interactions of these particular proteins/metabolites with other proteins in the pathway. The types of modifications (for e.g., phosphorylation, glycosylation, acetylation etc) taking place during any biological process can also be represented with proper experimental support from scientific literature. The pathway should be treated as an interacting network wherein the reactions between metabolites or gene products are represented. The pathway, in general shows various reactions taking place gradually in response to external stimuli. This ultimately leads to either activation or repression of a set of genes resulting into phenotypic changes which is of a common interest to researchers, academicians, doctors etc.

The collaboration between authors, journals and biocurators will facilitate the exchange of data between journal publications and databases and in turn make the signaling pathways, metabolic pathways, disease pathways etc a readymade tool to every biologist. Combined effort of Biocurators, researchers, academic institutions and funding agencies will promote Biocuration as a professional career. A better understanding of the pathways will help the pharmaceutical companies to design new drugs and academicians and research personals to carry out research in new areas.

References:

[1] Waagmeester AS, Kelder T, Evelo CT. The role of bioinformatics in pathway curation. Genes & nutrition 2008 Dec;3(3-4):139-42.

Total Pageviews

Ask an Expert - Visit my Virtual Office at LivePerson

Website to Mobile with GinWiz