A DNA Mystery in Seeds

I read a blog by John Michael Greer, and last week he wrote about seeds and the incredible amount of information they store in their DNA. 

Mr. Greer said:

"This is why when you tap a seed envelope against your hand and send a single seed rolling out onto your palm, you’re holding two billion years of stored information. That’s how long, according to current paleontology, the process of evolution has been shaping the genetic code of living things related to the ones we encounter today, and every generation across that unimaginable length of time has contributed something to the shaping of the little packet of genetic material, nutrition, and protective layers we call a plant seed."

So, he's saying the information stored in the seed has been collected and perhaps shaped by earlier generations of that seed (and other factors) for a very long time, is in the current seed's DNA. That information certainly affects the characteristic growth of the seed into a plant. The seed contains genetic information to help it grow into roots, stems, stalks, flowers, fruit, leaves...

But think about this: our human DNA also contains all our genetic information. The DNA, genes, or genetic information, in every cell in our body is exactly the same. The DNA, the genetic material, the genetic program is identical in the arms and the legs, and so are the chemicals, the proteins... and are also exactly like those in my skin, or my heart muscle. So, how did the genetic information in my legs and arms know for some of them to take the form of a leg, some to take the form of an arm, and still others to take the various other forms in my body? The morphogentetic fields give the plans of the developing organism.

A plant follows the same biological rules: the genes in the leaves of a plant are the same as the genes in the roots, or in the fruit.

Many of the biologists who study the development of form in plants and animals have the theory that developing organisms are shaped by something they call morphic fields. We all have seen short videos of morphing where one human face morphs or changes into another face, and there are many computer programs designed to let us play with this form of creativity. So, the idea of morphing is not really new to us.

These morphic fields are scientifically described as "self-organizing fields of influence", comparable to other know  fields such as magnetic fields. The problem is that no one really knows (yet) what morphic fields really are or how they work.

Rupert Sheldrake has this to say:

The Hypothesis of Morphic Fields
"All self-organizing systems are wholes made up of parts, which are themselves wholes at a lower level, such as atoms in molecules and molecules in crystals. The same is true of organelles in cells, cells in tissues, tissues in organs, organs in organisms, organisms in social groups. At each level, the morphic field gives each whole its characteristic properties and interconnects and coordinates the constituent parts.

The fields responsible for the development and maintenance of bodily form in plants and animals are called morphogenetic fields. In animals, the organization of behavior and mental activity depends on behavioral and mental fields. The organization of societies and cultures depends on social and cultural fields. All these kinds of organizing fields are morphic fields.

These fields are supposed to be within and around these organisms that they organize. There are hierarchies of fields within fields. So in our bodies there is a liver field, a kidney field, an eye field, and so on. Within those fields are the fields for the tissues and fields of the
cells—nested hierarchies of fields within fields.

Morphogenetic fields have a holistic property that is not present in chunks of matter."

My understanding is Sheldrake says morphogenetic fields impose patterns of organization on organisms, and later in the article he says the patterns become "habitual". That makes sense to me... If we grow a plant that normally has green leaves and one individual plant sports a variegated leaf, we can propagate the variegated plant with a probability that more variegation will happen in subsequent generations. The means by which the activity-pattern (in this case, the variegation) is passed on to subsequent generations (systems) is called morphic resonance.

The science of all this is very complex, and I barely understand the top tip of the iceberg, so to speak. I know that years ago when I read about The Hundreth Monkey effect, it was said to be a myth. Now, science is beginning to prove otherwise by morphic fields and morphic resonance.

Photo is in the Public Domain

Here's one thought I have: If it's true that something unknown outside the genetic imprint affects things like seeds and people, isn't it also a possiblity that there may actually be something to the subtle energies coming at us from outside our lovely blue orb? That the gravitational pull of our moon may indeed have a variable affect on plant growth the same way the moon affects tides? And if the moon, why not Saturn, or another huge chunk of matter out in the Universe, in some way? Rudolph Steiner thought so, and so do many of today's agricultural and biological researchers and scientists.

If those subtle energies affect the organisms we call plants, animals and humans, what effect might they have on carbon (biochar?) or mineral components in our soils? 

The implications are certainly thought-provoking.  

My goal is to grow foods that are brimming with a vital energy no longer evident in most of our foods, and conventional or even organic methods of natural fertilizers and pesticides just don't cut it.  My garden is slowly becoming an experiment with Nature, rather than imposing on Nature.

The Genome Wager

I came across this wager while researching morphic fields in my "eye of a newt' quest... Somehow it all ties together with my quest, and I hope I am still around to see the outcome of the wager.

The wager arose from Rupert's debate with Lewis Wolpert, The Nature of Life - a Scientific Debate at the Cambridge Science Festival, March 20, 2009. Lewis Wolpert and Rupert announced a wager on the predictive power of the genome. Their wager was announced in the New Scientist on July 8, 2009.

From Newton to Hawking, scientists love wagers. Now Lewis Wolpert has bet Rupert Sheldrake a case of fine port that:

Per Lewis Wolpert:
"By 1 May 2029, given the genome of a fertilised egg of an animal or plant, we will be able to predict in at least one case all the details of the organism that develops from it, including any abnormalities."

Per Rupert Sheldrake:
"Lewis Wolpert's faith in the predictive power of the genome is misplaced. Genes enable organisms to make proteins, but do not contain programs or blueprints, or explain the development of embryos.

Random molecular permutations simply cannot explain how organisms work. Instead, cells, tissues and organs develop in a modular manner, shaped by morphogenetic fields, first recognised by developmental biologists in the 1920s. Wolpert himself acknowledges the importance of such fields. Among biologists, he is best known for "positional information", by which cells "know" where they are within the field of a developing organ, such as a limb. But he believes morphogenetic fields can be reduced to standard chemistry and physics. I disagree. I believe these fields have organising abilities, or systems properties, that involve new scientific principles."

The wager will be decided on May 1, 2029, and if the outcome is not obvious, the Royal Society, the world’s most venerable scientific organization, will be asked to adjudicate. The winner will receive a case of fine port, Quinta do Vesuvio, 2005, which should have reached perfect maturity by 2029 and is being stored in the cellars of The Wine Society.

Both have set out their cases in New Scientist here: The Genome Wager.

Here's an observation about The Human Genome Project, from Sheldrake:

"The Human Genome Project has itself set back the hopes it engendered. First, our genome contains only between 20,000 and 25,000 genes, far fewer than the 100,000 expected. In contrast, sea urchins have about 26,000, and rice plants 38,000.

Moreover, our genome differs very little from the chimpanzee's genome, the sequencing of which was completed in 2005. As Svante Pääbo, director of the Chimpanzee Genome Project, commented: "We cannot see in this why we are so different from chimpanzees." (1)

Wolpert is not alone in believing in the predictive value of the genome. Governments, venture capitalists and medical charities have bet and are still betting billions of dollars on it. More than a case of fine port is at stake.

Take the eye of a newt...

Photo Courtesy of Garethfw's Photostream

Yep, I'm going out on a limb and looking into things most folk believe is foolishness at best, or witchcraft at worst... Quantum Agriculture.

For several years I have been trying to increase Brix in the fruits and vegetables I grow. My efforts have taken me to continuing research of micronutrients, micro-organisms and biochar, with judicious additions to my garden. Even though there has been some improvement, I still believe there is something missing, something I'm not quite 'getting'.

My recent 'discovery' about Earthing for human health has brought me full circle back to Rudolph Steiner's work on Biodynamics, and folks like Phillip Callahan, Hugh Lovel, Peter Thompkins, Christopher Bird, T. Galen Hieronymus and a few others who are out there adding to that knowledge base and expanding it.

I think what I'm not 'getting' is the effects of subtle cosmic energies (various radiation wave lengths?) and how to use those energies properly to our advantage and balance. Over many centuries, humankind relied upon cosmic influences... astrology, if you will. Then as science became the rational mind, we stopped believing that the moon, or constellations or planets as they (we) moved through the heavens, could influence anything, much less the growth and nutritional value of food crops. Most of us today read our horoscopes with a grain of salt, while merely a few accept them religiously. (I suspect that's because a published daily horoscope is very generalized, and doesn't take into account all the possible cosmic influences which vary for each individual from the moment of birth.)

I started giving lip service to planting by the moon 3-4 years ago, but it has been just that: lip service. No real understanding that the various planets or constellations might have any effect, although the moon's influence (like on the tides) might. I certainly didn't explore any of the why. It just seemed akin to nonsense and flew in the eyes of what we (current generations) are taught. Oh, I saw differences in planting by the moon, but it was akin to reading "Run, Spot, Run" and thinking I understood the complexity involved overall in reading anything. I now know it's not quite so simple.

Rupert Sheldrake (Dogs That Know When Their Owners Are Coming Home) introduced the phrase "morphic fields" to describe the patterns of energy that permeate all things, connect all things... from chemistry and microbiology to people, planets and galaxies. Steiner used the terms 'formative forces', 'ethers' and 'astrality' to describe morphic fields; William Reich used 'orgone energy', Hieronymus used 'eloptic energy' and Tiller used 'subtle energies' to describe the same thing.

These terms (morphic fields, subtle energy/quantum mechanics, fluid dynamics, chaos theory, fractals, holographics and projective geometry) all are part of what Lovel calls Quantum Agriculture... and I already know I will wish I had studied more physics and chemistry in college.

I have lots of research to do over the winter, and then lots more doing trials in my garden, to see if any of this actually works. My gut feeling is that it does, but it will take doing it myself to overcome any Doubting Thomas aspect. I don't really care how many angels can dance on the head of a pin; I want to know what I can do with that information!  It won't happen quickly, I'm sure. I am now four years into my work with biochar and micronutrients, and just beginning to see results.