Electric shocks elevate chemical production in plants

[apothecary]

Excuse the dodgy link. This was apparently a BBC news article but slipped by me and I can't find it now. Nature News is charging for their link.

I found this most interesting because it seems to work on more than one type of compound (i.e. not just alkaloids).

================================================

http://www.zeenews.com/articles.asp?aid=43...=ENV&sname=

London, March 29: A new research has revealed that electric shocks can make plants produce more chemicals, which could be used to help increase yields of commercially useful biologicals.

According to a report in Nature News, researchers have long known that stressing plants can force them to take defensive action, often ramping up the production of protective chemicals that, for example, make them more resistant to insect attack.

A few milliamps of electricity can cause plants to increase synthesis of chemicals. These compounds often also have a pharmacological or commercial value, so the trick could be used to help increase yields of commercially useful biologicals.

Artemisinic acid, from sweet wormwood, for example, is used in malarial medications, and shikonin, from the purple gromwell plant, is used against skin infections.

It has become common practice to stress such plants into increasing their yields. This is usually done using physical stress elicitors, including bits of the micro-organisms that normally attack the plants, or irritants made from metallic compounds such as copper chloride.

Now, research groups at the University of Arizona in Tucson have found that the application of an electric current to the hairy roots of the poisonous herb Hyoscyamus muticus stimulated the production of the herb’s toxin hyoscyamine.

This finding inspired Hans VanEtten from the University of Arizona, and his colleagues, to test sub-lethal levels of electrical currents on other plants, to assess electricity’s potential to elevate chemical production.

His team exposed eight different plant species, ranging from Japanese pagoda tree seedlings to pea plants to weak electrical currents of 30 milliamps.

Seven of the plants increased their production of defensive chemicals. The average boost of chemical production was 20 times. One plant, a type of alfalfa, increased its chemical yield by 168 times.

These values are very similar to those achieved using chemical elicitors, and seem to have no lethal effects — just a negative effect on growth.

The treatment can even be used over and over again without the build up of any unwanted material.

According to VanEtten, “The fact that we can use electricity instead of toxic materials to elicit chemical production is very exciting because it means we get to look at how these chemicals form without having to constantly add and remove toxins from the system.”

“This is a really novel and creative approach that I’ve never seen before,” saod plant metabolic engineer Fabricio Medina-Bolivar from Arkansas State University in Jonesboro.

“The possibilities for using electricity with plants in this way are absolutely tremendous,” he added.

Bureau Report

[apothecary]

The implications of this are huge?

Imagine everyone growing their own 10cm ganja plant that yields the same as a 3 footer?

[Auxin]

Thats cool!

I wonder if they've investigated the probability that it would result in organic electrochemical side reactions.

I wonder if it'd work if you restricted the voltage enough to avoid most electrochemical reactions.

Finally a use for all those damn AA batteries with 0.8 volts left

Time to review electronics.

[Jesus On Peyote]

Does it affect yield, or just the chemicals?

Example, using it on a small apple tree, would it increase the amount/size of apples, or the chemicals which reside in the apples?

Either way, interesting stuff to say the least.

[Torsten]

Does it affect yield, or just the chemicals?

Example, using it on a small apple tree, would it increase the amount/size of apples, or the chemicals which reside in the apples?

"The average boost of chemical production was 20 times"

[devance]

Sounds like it could work.

Root tissue culture is another way.

I got a unit that uses brain wave type of cycles to pulsate a water bed motor.

I don't have a water bed just the unit which I got at a flea market.

Might give it a try.

But I was interested in lobster aqua culture farming but as as their cannabalistic I thought that a few amps at the proper frequency might stop that.

Never got around to trying it.

Another million dollar idea never tried.

[Yeti101]

Current through cacti, current through tryptamine bearing plants, current through SD (where legal) - this is definetly worth chasing up!

Edit-

Here is the New Scientist article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1355...al-rewards.html

And the actual journal article detailing the method etc: http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/b.../bp0703329.html

Seems that (for at least part of the experiment) they were running the current through hydroponic solution and extracting the plant chems from that solution. I wonder how that might work with other plants that have good stuff in the roots? I only had a brief read, but I didn't see any info n how this might have affected the alkaloid production in the rest of the plant (but I could be wrong). So it might be that we have to run the current through the part of the plant we want to influence - or stressing the roots might work for everything. We will just have to break out the batteries and alligator clips and see what we can come up with.

Edited April 27, 2008 by Yeti101

[Auxin]

I was pondering on the possible mechanisms. Everything by reflex is attributed to response to stress. But isnt it possible the effects they observed were in responce to toxification when the plants endogenous chems reacted with eachother in odd ways as a result of electrolysis forming xenobiotics which would trigger plant defense and metabolic systems?

Edit: just noticed the full journal article was linked there, thanks

*reads*

Edited April 28, 2008 by Auxin

[devance]

Maybe a salt buildup around roots.

All is up grabs for scientific theory which why not called natural laws.

[apothecary]

Current through cacti, current through tryptamine bearing plants, current through SD (where legal) - this is definetly worth chasing up!

Edit-

Here is the New Scientist article: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1355...al-rewards.html

And the actual journal article detailing the method etc: http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/b.../bp0703329.html

Ta! Maybe I shouldn't have bothered emailing the researcher and should've just asked you

Seems that (for at least part of the experiment) they were running the current through hydroponic solution and extracting the plant chems from that solution. I wonder how that might work with other plants that have good stuff in the roots? I only had a brief read, but I didn't see any info n how this might have affected the alkaloid production in the rest of the plant (but I could be wrong). So it might be that we have to run the current through the part of the plant we want to influence - or stressing the roots might work for everything. We will just have to break out the batteries and alligator clips and see what we can come up with.

They mentioned that for plants who produce the alkaloids in the roots (i.e. Hyoscyamus) and transport them up into the plant, this is the technique. If you read the actual paper (which is linked at the bottom for free, woot!) he goes into much more detail.

Run down is for plants in hydro solution was 10mA of 9V applied for 3 hours using conductive plates. My guess is you could do the same for stuff in pots maybe a bit longer, as long as the soil is wet its plenty conductive. For aerial stuff just wire up the nodes with a bit less mA and do it for longer?

Seems it does cause new compounds in the TC experiments they did vs controls and other elicitors.

[AndyAmine.]

Would suit a hydro setup well too because the roots are already in water which is a great medium for evenly spreading the electricity, albeit a little dangerous unless using low volatge batteries or something.

I look forward to hearing more about this.

Good find Sina.

[devance]

I think it be more as a more faster and controled flowering of a plant we all know and love.

Thats right okra.

http://www.chooseveg.com/display_recipe.asp?recipe=56

'Cajun Vegetable Gumbo

* 2 lbs. greens (collard, mustard, or turnip), washed and stemmed

* 1/4 cup plus 2 Tbsp. vegetable oil

* 1/4 cup flour

* 2 large onions, finely diced

* 1 green bell pepper, finely diced

* 4 stalks celery, finely diced

* 1 16-oz. can plum tomatoes, drained and coarsely chopped

* 1/4 cup liquid hot sauce (such as Texas Pete’s)

* 3 bay leaves

* 1 tsp. file powder (a Cajun spice)

* Cayenne pepper, to taste

* 1/2 tsp. each thyme, oregano, and basil

* 1/4 cup fresh parsley, chopped

* 3 garlic cloves, minced

* Salt and freshly ground black pepper, to taste

* 6 cups vegetable or faux chicken broth

* 1 10-oz. package frozen okra

* 1 16-oz. can kidney beans, drained and rinsed

* 2 cups cooked white rice

Place the greens in a large soup pot with enough water to just cover the greens. Bring to a boil and cook for 15 minutes. Drain, reserving 2 cups of the cooking water. On a cutting board, coarsely chop the greens and set aside.

In a small saucepan over medium-low heat, whisk 1/4 cup oil and the flour together and cook, stirring constantly, until the roux is a dark reddish-brown, about 15 minutes. Remove the pan from the heat and set aside.

In the large soup pot, heat the remaining 2 tablespoons of oil and sauté the onions, bell pepper, celery, and tomatoes for about 10 minutes or until the vegetables are wilted. Add the hot sauce, bay leaves, file powder, cayenne, thyme, oregano, basil, parsley, garlic, salt, and pepper and cook for 5 minutes.

Add the roux, vegetable or faux chicken broth, and the reserved greens-cooking water, stirring well to blend in the roux. Reduce the heat and simmer, uncovered, for 15 minutes. Add the cooked collard greens, okra, kidney beans, and rice and cook for 5

[Yeti101]

Thanks Sina. Being a philosophy student the bulk of my knowledge is useless, but my research skills are pretty good

I guess it's time to go back to the books and look at where certain plants produce their useful chemicals and if they are transported to where we traditionally find them. Eg: If I have a hydroponic wormwood plant and I electrify the roots will I end up with more thujone in the leaves?

On the up side, it's not a great deal of current being used - 10mA is pretty safe.

Edited April 28, 2008 by Yeti101

[apothecary]

I guess it's time to go back to the books and look at where certain plants produce their useful chemicals and if they are transported to where we traditionally find them. Eg: If I have a hydroponic wormwood plant and I electrify the roots will I end up with more thujone in the leaves?

Not sure 100% but the original article says they test on another Artemisia species with good results, which is promising .

[ThunderIdeal]

this is pretty interesting in terms of allelopathy, and organic gardening in general (would it still be organic? heh).

it typically refers to a plant suppressing other plants through soil excretions (which might be useful for veg control), but i believe the term applies any time a plant affects another with the release of chemicals.

imagine a few marigolds antagonising insects 168 times more than usual. you supercharge them, whack them in the ground and it probably wouldn't matter if you've created weird chemicals in that plant, because it's not a crop.

OR

a plant grown for it's scent, and electrocuted for more scent. in fact, i should stop typing this and go find a Michelia figo to zap.

OR...

actually i'm straining to think of uses in the garden, aside from larger yields of chemical products.

maybe zap a canna before using it to make some vert's recipe mutant juice.

maybe if you turned two plants into a bunch of cuttings, the one that was pre-zapped would have a better strike rate.

maybe you just want plant growth to slow down, in which case this might not cause any visible damage.

[ayjay101]

I'm wondering whether this discovery applies to mycology as well?

The potential consequences of increasing chemical production that much whilst reducing growth simaltaneously are frightening!

[Yeti101]

I gathered from the article that it didn't slow the growth. But experiments using pulsed (AC I suppose) currents on plant cell cultures have had an effect on their growth. Can't remember the reference.

I agree that if it worked on fungi there could be spectacular (and disastrous) results. But I'm going to focus on a few select vascular plants, once I figure out the resistance of potting mix etc. Combining this with other factors known to increase alkaloid production, like zeatin ( http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/inde...showtopic=16787 ) could lead to literally mind-blowing yields.

I was thinking last night about ion migration when using DC current. Could the application of current to a plant, eg +ve on the roots and -ve on the top cause a change in the distribution of alkaloids? Could this be used to force the plant to suck up more of whatever ionic solution introduced into the growth media? Not that this would happen as the experiment in the article is set up. Certainly 2 electrodes in soil would attract salts etc. (is this paragraph a red herring? I think so - feel free to ignore it ).

[mu!]

leave the poor plants alone

mother nature is soiling herself (ohoho ) at the thought of you electrocuting her for your greedy "needs"

[Yeti101]

leave the poor plants alone

mother nature is soiling herself (ohoho ) at the thought of you electrocuting her for your greedy "needs"

Not all application of electricity is unpleaseant....

[apothecary]

Yeti, I believe the paper states somewhere that the electricity does have a negative effect on growth (obviously not enough to kill the plant). It's paraphrased in the original article.

[Yeti101]

Yeti, I believe the paper states somewhere that the electricity does have a negative effect on growth (obviously not enough to kill the plant). It's paraphrased in the original article.

Oops, don't know how I missed that. There's even a graph: http://pubs.acs.org/isubscribe/journals/bi...3329f00003.html

But the rate of growth recovers after 6 days.

Looking at this again (especially the graphs and Table 1.), my mind still boggles at the possibility that we could even half recreate these results.

[apothecary]

Exactly.

Anyone got any hypothesis on where to attach the wires for aerial parts of the plant?

I don't want to ride this meme too much but in the case of Cannabis where the actives are created mostly in/on the flower, would attaching it to the nodal points be sufficient? I guess so in the case of other plants where the actives are produced in the vascular tissue or whatever, but for pot would you have to ...wire up the buds?

[Yeti101]

Depends on what the exact mechanism is for actives being created on/in the flowers. Are precursors created in other parts of the plant and then transported to the flowers? And does an increased level of these precursors lead to increased production of actives? If the answer to these two questions is 'yes' then you won't have to wire the buds - which would be good, because that sounds really fiddly.

My gut feeling however is that you would get better results applying the current where the actives (and not their precursors) are created, but I have no evidence for that. Still the respective hypotheses are easy enough to yest. Multiple plants (or sets of plants) one lot with wired flowers, others with wired roots or stems etc and one non-wired control group. Zap, test and evaluate. Sounds like a fun project.

For wiring aerial parts, I think columnar cacti will be good candidates. Poor cacti, they thought they'd seen the worst with the dopamine injections, but little did they know!

Personally I'd like to have a go at cultivating an electric M.hostilis or similar. Ride the Electric Mimosa!

Edited May 1, 2008 by Yeti101

[GingaNinja]

I find it strange that people have gone nuts in other threads arguing about bad treatment of sentient plants for the purpose of obtaining a particular chemical yet are excited about giving plants electric shocks to increase chemical levels. or are only certain plants and chemicals more special than others

[Jesus On Peyote]

Bad treatment and shocks are very different sciences, in the way ittle work. i think..

Alot of plants are chemically purpose based, at least things like,be it the vitamins in fruit, medicaly used plants, or "illicit" plants. every plant has a purpose.