Ky Bowman spent last Wednesday morning in Santa Cruz at training camp for the Warriors’ G League affiliate. Later that night, Stephen Curry’s broken left hand would thrust him into Golden State’s rotation.Curry will miss at least three months after surgery on his left hand. That, along with a growing list of injuries, from Klay Thompson (ACL) and Draymond Green (sprained index finger), to Kevon Looney (neuropathy) and Jacob Evans (adductor strain), has forced the Warriors organization to …
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest It might seem there’s an upside to the rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Plants are growing faster.However, in many species of plants, quantity is not quality. Most plants are growing faster, but they have on average more starch, less protein and fewer key vitamins in them, said James Metzger, a professor and chair of the Department of Horticulture and Crop Science in The Ohio State University’s College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences (CFAES).This change is happening because the current level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is 400 parts per million, nearly double what it was in the middle of the 18th century, the start of the industrial revolution. And it keeps rising, spurred by the burning of fuels.Taking in carbon dioxide and light, a plant forms sugars and starches first, then other nutrients including protein, fat and antioxidants. Though carbon dioxide is necessary for plants to live, too much carbon dioxide can reduce the amount of valuable nutrients the plant produces including iron, zinc and vitamin C.“The loss of nutrients, particularly protein, is serious,” Metzger said. “That does not help in the effort for people to eat more balanced diets and increase their nutrition.”Animal meat and dairy products are a significant source of protein for humans. So, if animals aren’t getting sufficient protein from plants, that will affect what they can produce as food.What’s happening is that a higher level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere reduces the amount of photorespiration that occurs in plants. During photorespiration, plants take in oxygen from the environment, release carbon dioxide and produce waste products including glycolic acid, which a plant can’t use. In order for the plant to turn the glycolic acid into a product it can use, the plant has to do more photosynthesis, the process through which plants use sunlight, water and carbon dioxide to create glucose, a form of sugar that plants need to survive.Low rates of photorespiration, caused by the higher amounts of carbon dioxide, are associated with low stress levels in plants, which ironically is not a good thing. That’s because stressed plants respond by producing antioxidants such as vitamins C and E, as well as higher protein levels. So, as carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere rise, there is less photorespiration and therefore less stress on plants. And the reduced stress means increased growth, but at a cost, a decline in the nutritional quality of the plants.“This has been observed in many different species of plants,” Metzger said.If the plant is not producing enough antioxidants, that’s not just less healthy for people who later eat the plant, but also for the plant’s ability to fend off diseases, Metzger said. Plants can become more vulnerable to diseases as well as insects. With fewer nutrients in the plants, the insects have to devour more of them to get the same nutritional value.Not all plants react to the rising carbon dioxide levels in the same way. Some crops, including corn and sugar cane, do not decrease in nutritional value in the midst of higher carbon dioxide levels. That’s because their photosynthesis process differs from that of most other plants.Temperature is a factor as well. Depending on the temperature, plants can react in different ways to high carbon dioxide levels. The rising carbon dioxide levels that are triggering more photosynthesis can hinder the growth of some plants cultivated in temperatures below 59 degrees Fahrenheit, such as winter wheat, said Katrina Cornish, Ohio Research Scholar and Endowed Chair in Bio-based Emergent Materials with CFAES.Plants grown in hot weather conditions can also be impeded by elevated carbon dioxide. In hot temperatures, many plants stay cool by opening wide the pores on the underside of their leaves. But in an atmosphere with high carbon dioxide, the pores do not open as wide, so plants are not able to keep themselves cool, Cornish said. This could cause “the plants to become crispy critters and die, when they were OK at lower carbon dioxide levels,” she said.“Plants need time to adapt to the increase in carbon dioxide levels. And the increase is happening so quickly, plants are not going to have a chance to adapt.”In the short term, the additional photosynthesis spurred by higher carbon dioxide levels may bring about small gains in the amount of leaves, stem and shoots that are produced by a crop but not necessarily in the portion of the crop that can be harvested. And in the long term, it’s going to do more harm to plants than good, Cornish said.“There’s going to be a tipping point, and that tipping point is different for each crop,” Cornish said.Already, rice plants grown in elevated carbon dioxide have been shown to produce more tillers, which include the stems and leaves of the plant, but fewer and smaller grains.One way to prevent the higher carbon dioxide levels from affecting plant growth and yield is through plant crossbreeding and gene manipulation, Metzger pointed out. Both could lead to the creation of varieties of plants whose growth and nutrient levels will be less affected by the higher amounts of carbon dioxide in the environment.More research is needed to figure out how a plant produces antioxidants, Metzger said.“I think it’s important that we put some effort into really understanding how those biochemical pathways are controlled and how we can manipulate them without any harmful effects on the plant.”
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest Leave a CommentOhio Farm Bureau Director of Water Quality Research Jordan Hoewischer hosts Aaron Heilers for a discussion of the Blanchard River Demonstration Farms Network. Heilers is project manager for the network, which is a partnership between Farm Bureau and NRCS that showcases conservation practices and provides educational opportunities for the public, government officials and farmers to share what is being learned from the farms’ practices.Field Day with Jordan Hoewischer is an ongoing series of conversations with experts and leaders who are helping to shape and secure the future of Ohio’s ag industry for generations to come.Below are excerpts from the interview, and here is the transcript. Listen to the complete episode and past episodes via Soundcloud, or subscribe to the podcast on iTunes and Google Play.Jordan: So what are the objectives of the project? I mean obviously, you know, …we’re demonstrating there’s certain things on a farm. So what’s the overall objective of the project?Aaron: Yeah so we have three farms in the demonstration farm project but our overall purpose is, once we had those farms established, was to identify traditional and innovative conservation practices that exist out there and implement them on these particular operations and then showcase them and showcase their ability to reduce nutrients coming off the farm landscape. So we’re looking at testing basically conservation systems and controlling nonpoint source pollution. And you know as I go around the state and talk to folks, or people come into the demonstration farms to see what those farmers are doing. We’re basically trying to find practices in in three buckets. So farmers can implement practices in the field, they can do things at the edge of the field or they can do things in the stream. And so our goal is to have farmers from around the state be able to come here to these farms and pick and choose practices from each one of those buckets that fit their farming operation. You hear it all the time that not every farm is the same. Different weather, different soils, different management styles. And we want to make sure that we have options available that farmers can find that right practice for their farm and then have scientific data backing it up that it’s actually going to reduce nutrient loss from their landscape. Jordan: What would be the limitations from you know what what are some of the messaging that we’re talking to people about using the successes and the limitations of subsurface placement at least with the way that Kellogg’s are doing.Aaron: Cost. That’s the biggest thing and a lot of these practices come down to economics and that’s one of the main things that we like to talk about as people come through the farms is these practices may be really good at reducing nutrients. But can farmers afford to do them? Can they they manage the type of practice we’re asking them to do. And that’s the unique thing that we have with the Kelloggs and the Kurt farm and the size discrepancy there is can we make a practice like subsurface placement fit for both type of operations. So the way the Kelloggs do it with a 60 foot wide strip tillage toolbar costs the $180,000 dollars takes a heck of a big tractor to be able to pull it That’s not feasible for a 500 acre farm or somebody that’s smaller than that. So what tools are out there that can accomplish the same task. But can be more affordable for that smaller producer and that’s the that’s one of the things that we want to be able to flush out through this project.Jordan: Is there anything that kind of pops out that that’s really resonating with people that come to the farm any like surprises or any anything that you think is kind of surprising that we’ve heard from from people coming out.Aaron: We had a group out from Toledo a non-farm group that walked through one of the farm operations and we asked them that same question of you know what, what were they surprised to see that day and they their overall takeaway was that that they had no idea how sophisticated agriculture was. And I think that should make us all to kind of take a step back and realize that are we doing a good enough job of getting our message out to folks and having that conversation because you know what we did that day was show them how the farmer takes soil tests and gets those reports back and how they do yield mapping things that we probably take for granted that these folks had no idea that that most farmers are doing these types of things and yet these are folks that are out there in the community potentially saying things that are negative against agriculture. So I always keep that in the back of my mind when groups come in is that they most likely don’t know a lot of the things that we take for granted and that we have to kind of start at the base level and build them up from just a general knowledge standpoint and let them ask questions because you know as I said earlier, they are usually just generally curious about what today’s modern farmer is doing. Leave a Comment
How inexpensively can you put together a digital cinema camera package? Here’s what to spend your money on in the post-peak-camera era.Film will only become an art when its materials are as inexpensive as pencil and paper.– Jean CocteauWords from a mid 20th century filmmaker, often repeated when talking about the “democratization” of filmmaking. A lot of us have assumed he meant the cost of gear, so I did a reality check to see if we are there yet, or more practically: how inexpensively can I put together a digital cinema camera package?I spent less than $100 on a camera body and memory card, and grand total of 178 dollars to build a rig with a camera body, recording media, interchangeable lenses, rails and follow focus. Here’s how you can do it, too.USED IS “NEW” TO YOUIn the last couple of years, the camera body has become the most volatile expense when building rig for filmmaking. It started with the Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera (BMPCC): a micro 4/3rds sized sensor that captured images in high bitrate and raw video codecs that cost less that a thousand dollars. The trend has continued with DSLRs and other M4/3 systems gaining higher bit rate codecs, slog and UHD (aka 4K). The decision to shoot on these small camera bodies no longer means a compromise in recording quality. This removes a significant barrier between professional and prosumer gear.While DSLRs and other camera/video hybrid M4/3 systems are priced above the one thousand dollar mark, Blackmagic continues to lower the price bar, debuting its micro cinema camera at NAB this year. The BMMCC shots raw 1080P video, boasting 13 stops of latitude on a 16mm sized sensor. The camera is tiny — it’s really just a sensor with a box around it. No screen, no frills, just a high-end sensor that you can attach all kinds of things to. This is a camera designed for a drone or to be shoved into small places.The Black Magic Pocket Cinema CameraThis is a good thing, because in a year, there will be larger sensors recording more stops of latitude, higher frame rates, and costing less. It makes so much sense to just swap a sensor unit out to prevent the rest of your gear from becoming obsolete.This could be the subject of a very interesting article, that’s not what I am writing. I am writing about what to do when someone throws out their old amazing camera to pursue the shiny and new. This is about the camera for the “rest of us”.1080P capable camera bodies are already flooding the used markets of Ebay, Craigslist, and Amazon. We have reached some kind of critical mass in abundant cheap digital camera gear. There are enough spare parts laying around now to quickly and cheaply cobble together a digital motion picture camera. Will this camera set the bar for performance and image quality? No. That’s not the point. This project is not about high-end performance, it’s about an “all access” affordable motion picture camera that borders on semi-disposable. I give you the “$100 Digital Cinema Camera.”THE RULESThe Panasonic Lumix GF2First, some ground rules: by cinematic image, I mean a large enough sensor that a visible change in depth of field could be achieved natively (aka shallow focus.) Second, the sensor had to be sensitive enough so that at least 7-8 stops of latitude would be possible. Finally, I wanted the recording format to be as lossless as possible. 24 progressive frames per second was the target frame rate. Ideally I would get this natively, but, if I had to post process to get this, that would work too. And I wanted to spend a hundred dollars or less on the camera body and media.Must record an HD imageMust record either a native 24P frame rate or a 60i frame rate (to convert to 24P in post)interchangeable lensescamera raw or high bit rate codec to minimize compression artifactscamera + recording media < $100large sensor, equivalent to 16mm or largerAny accessory must be less than 40 dollars, preferably less than 20!A hundred dollars is arbitrary, I know. It’s kind of an economic and psychological pain threshold. It’s the cost of a week’s groceries, or two and a half tanks of gas, a pair of nice sneakers, etc. It’s an amount that fades into the day to day background of a large percentage of people’s economic lives. While not the cost of a pen and paper, it approaches a level of affordability that has the potential to make it just as ubiquitous. Most importantly, it puts the camera and potential for cinema in the hands of some of the most creative and least economically affluent people I know — young people.I settled on a hacked Panasonic Lumix GF2 shooting 1080/60i at 50m/bits that I picked up used on Amazon for 78 dollars. Using Magic Bullet Frames I was able to swizzle the fields and convert the 60i to 24P just like in the olden days of 2002.THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CHEAPOpteka CXS-25 15mm Rod System When you spend $78 on a camera it gets hard to justify buying expensive support gear like a Zacuto rig. So instead I spent $60 on the cheapest used kit I could find on Amazon and got rails and a follow focus.I got a Nikon G to M4/3 adapter for $25 so I can use my Nikon 50mm f1.8 and Nikon 20mm f2.8 from my still camera. And I bought a 32GB class 10 SDHC card as an open box special at Best Buy for $15.HACKING THE CODECThere is a vibrant community of Lumix camera hackers that have juiced the video codec from a meager 17mbit AVCHD up to a card-crushing 110mbit monster. Also there’s a 100mbit MJPEG 4:2:2 codec if you have a fast enough SDHC card. I honestly can’t tell the difference between the rock-solid-50mbit AVCHD codec and the crashes-often-100mbit MJPEG. They both capture a tremendous amount of detail.RESULTSMy “$100” Cinema CameraIt works! Of course, there are funny things that you have to deal with since it’s a hacked codec (like the camera locking up from time to time.) But I have strapped this system to the top of my car and gone speeding down the streets of San Francisco with it, not really worrying if it flies off, because it was so inexpensive. The cost of the unit makes me feel way less precious about it, like pencil and paper.Am I making great cinema now that I have a close to zero-cost cinematic camera?Not really. While M3/4 systems and DSLRs are perfectly capable of capturing stunning cinematic moments, cameras don’t create cinema, they capture it. Cinema is what goes on in front of the lens with light, shadow, color, performance and story. Cinema is experience and craft, not a the result of a camera package alone.My advice is spend as little as you have to on a camera that works. Spend your budget on wardrobe, location, and lighting. By all means save your money, just don’t spend it on a camera package because now you don’t have to. Instead, take time off work and write a great story. Beautiful image making is unbelievably cheap to do now, almost the cost of pen and paper, while telling a compelling and cinematic story is just as hard, and costly, as it’s ever been.The upshot is that in a year or two you’ll be able to pick up a used 4K, HFR capable camera body with 17 stops of latitude for next-to-nothing. So, you know, start planning the shot list now!Here’s some more camera-related (and budget-minded) content from PremiumBeat:The Best Camera Options for Production Company Startups8 Killer Filmmaking Cameras Under $1,000Lens vs Camera: Which is a Better Investment?Ready to rush out and build your $100 cinema camera? Share your plan in the comments below!
Former India coach Greg Chappell has revealed that his insistence on pushing Sachin Tendulkar down the batting order against his wish during the 2007 World Cup led to a “breakdown” of relations with the iconic cricketer.Just before the 2011 World Cup, Chappell, now an Australian selector, has broken his four-year-long silence on the issue which had caused an upheaval in Indian cricket.Chappell now says that faced with a similar scenario he would have handled Tendulkar differently and left it to the batsman to pick his own place in the order.In a book on Tendulkar titled SACH, written by noted sports scribe Gautam Bhattacharya, Chappell has recalled the entire spat but insisted that he and Tendulkar buried the hatchet within a few days of the controversy.”At the outset let me clarify I never ever doubted Sachin Tendulkar’s commitment to the side. The only time I talked about him was in relation to the team’s World Cup venture. If you talk about a breakdown in relations, that possibly happened only around this time. Basically we differed on his batting order in the West Indies,” Chappell said in an interview published in the book which is due to hit the stands this week.Chappell said the conditions in the West Indies demanded a power-hitter in the middle order and the choice was between Virender Sehwag and Tendulkar. Since Sehwag refused the offer to come down the order, Tendulkar was approached who agreed reluctantly.”It wasn’t just me alone. Rahul Dravid was also involved in the thinking which felt the matches were going to get decided in those middle overs and you needed the brilliance of either a Sachin or Sehwag to play in that position,” Chappell revealed.advertisement”Sehwag didn’t seem very keen. So we sat down with Sachin who in any case was the first priority. We put it down to him and he seemed reluctant. He thought top-of-the-order was the best place for him as it has always been.But we were still in the discussion as Rahul and myself were convinced no other batsman in the team would be able to do it. Sachin finally agreed. Next day he got back to Rahul.Though he made it known that he was not happy doing it. He felt that his reputation demanded two places higher in the order,” he recalled in the interview.In hindsight, Chappell said he would have given the same suggestions but would have allowed Tendulkar to decide.”…that experience has taught me a lesson. Today confronted with a similar situation I would still put the idea across to him and explain. But if he shows any kind of discomfort I won’t push. I would let him decide,” Chappell said.Soon after the debacle, Tendulkar gave an emotional interview to a daily in which he said his commitment to the team was questioned by Chappell but the Aussie said the two had a chat and parted ways amicably.”With Sachin, I later on had a face-to-face chat. There was an issue about a write-up which had come out in the Times of India. We spoke the next day and I would like to believe parted on good terms. As I said earlier the only disagreement we had was over his place in the batting order which now is a thing of the past,” Chappell said.The former Australian captain went on to say that he admires Tendulkar for the ease with which he handles expectations of over a billion fans in a cricket-mad country.”During my years as the Indian Coach how people vied for a minute’s attention from him irrespective of wherever he went! Emotionally and physically it must be very draining to cope up with that sort of attention day in and day out. But he has handled it remarkably well.”He must be the most singlehanded devotee cricket has ever seen. Cricket has taken up so much of his life that at times you would wonder what is he going to do once he gives up the game!” he said.Chappell reiterated that his decision to quit as India coach was made before the 2007 World Cup disaster and the reason was clash of ideas with the BCCI.”I had presented the BCCI my road-map for the project Commitment to Excellence and they approved it. Yet there was a clear philosophical clash as to which direction the Group needed to go. I for one wasn’t prepared to compromise. If I had conceded then there would be no fight,” he said.advertisement”But I wanted to remain true to my beliefs and cricketing thought’s bottom-line ? it wasn’t going anywhere and whatever I had set out to do remained unattainable. That is why I decided to quit which was much before the World Cup.”So to set the record straight once again Sachin’s statement in the press against me had nothing to do with my discontinuing as the coach. As I said earlier we had parted on good terms,” he added.- With PTI inputs