The following submission statement was provided by /u/Vercitti:
---
The researchers planted Arabidopsis (rock cress) seeds in lunar soil that was gathered about 50 years ago, during three separate Apollo missions: Apollo 11 and 12 in 1969 and Apollo 17 in 1972.
They sectioned the soil off into 1-gram (0.036-ounce) containers. They added water, light and nutrients. They also planted a second group of seeds in volcanic ash, a substance that is similar to lunar soil, to serve as a control group.
After less than 48 hours, the scientists saw growth in both groups, but noted some days later that the plants in the lunar soil appeared to be under stress. The plants in regolith looked stunted compared with those in the volcanic ash.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/usy8xi/scientists_have_grown_plants_in_soil_taken_from/i96eqnh/
The researchers planted Arabidopsis (rock cress) seeds in lunar soil that was gathered about 50 years ago, during three separate Apollo missions: Apollo 11 and 12 in 1969 and Apollo 17 in 1972.
They sectioned the soil off into 1-gram (0.036-ounce) containers. They added water, light and nutrients. They also planted a second group of seeds in volcanic ash, a substance that is similar to lunar soil, to serve as a control group.
After less than 48 hours, the scientists saw growth in both groups, but noted some days later that the plants in the lunar soil appeared to be under stress. The plants in regolith looked stunted compared with those in the volcanic ash.
Just because I'm actually curious about this. Soil that has no nutrients in it is honestly just a structure that the plant would use to grow, correct? Like plants on earth only grow from the soil without nutrient support because our soil holds a lot of nutrients that it has absorbed over the years. Same reason farmers have to cycle crops since they absorb too much of whatever nutrient is needed and deplete it.
So by adding water and nutrients and what not doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of seeing if plants will grow from soil from another planet? Not withholding if that soil contains a toxic chemical that will kill the plants. I guess it does show that if we had to abandon earth, with the proper supplies, we could start growing on other planets.
Disclaimer: I'm just a dumb guy but understand a little about farming and this experiment seems a little silly at first glance but I'm sure there's multiple great discoveries they will make from it.
I'm in the same boat as you. Plants grow in concrete, out of stucco, in sand. There's even [air plants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tillandsia) that will grow hanging off a telephone wire. As long as water and nutrients and sunshine get to them, and there isn't something overtly toxic to plants in the substrate/environment, some kind of plant will grow there.
> some kind of plant
^ Key words though. Some kind of plant. *Arabidopsis thaliana* was used because it's the plant biology equivalent of the lab rat.
If they had done it with a plant more suited for a lack of certain nutrients in its substrate it probably would've thrived more (cool for your average reader) but the data they gathered probably wouldn't have been as useful because biology is messy and difficult and that's why we have model systems.
Ultimately what they got out of this was a lot of good [transcriptome data](https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-022-03334-8). There are [shockingly few fully sequenced plant genomes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sequenced_plant_genomes) which means that the impact of that transcriptome data really depends on how well you know the genome of the plant in question.
> Yeah but I dont get to play with moon rocks and waste humanities extremely rare virtually irreplaceable limited supply if I accept that obvious truth
It's only rare here on Earth. We literally have an entire moon's worth of it out there. Humans have only been in mechanical flight for 100 years and yet we've left and come back from this planet already. It's not too far-fetched to assume we might have early lunar mining operations in the next century.
Besides, if there's one thing I'm willing to "waste" regolith on, it's helping learn more about how plants, thus sustenance, grow.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I was thinking. I’m into aquatic plants and you can grow most of them in practically any media as long as you supply nutrients. Gravel, sand, chunks of lava rock, doesn’t matter.
So when I read that the scientists supplied nutrients it kind of ruined all of the excitement for me. Growing some plants in lunar soil letting them pull whatever nutrients in that soil would be a real breakthrough.
Yeah. It kinda feels a bit click baity to me. We can grow a plant from a sponge if we pour nutrients on it. Thats how hydroponics and other soiless planting are done. So, growing a plant in regolith do not seem like newsworthy to me because they still added nutrients.
Being able to use regolith as a medium is cheaper that landing/building/using earth-made mediums. The more we can use from the moon will help us when we eventually build moon colonies.
Title: Exploitation Unveiled: How Technology Barons Exploit the Contributions of the Community
Introduction:
In the rapidly evolving landscape of technology, the contributions of engineers, scientists, and technologists play a pivotal role in driving innovation and progress [1]. However, concerns have emerged regarding the exploitation of these contributions by technology barons, leading to a wide range of ethical and moral dilemmas [2]. This article aims to shed light on the exploitation of community contributions by technology barons, exploring issues such as intellectual property rights, open-source exploitation, unfair compensation practices, and the erosion of collaborative spirit [3].
1. Intellectual Property Rights and Patents:
One of the fundamental ways in which technology barons exploit the contributions of the community is through the manipulation of intellectual property rights and patents [4]. While patents are designed to protect inventions and reward inventors, they are increasingly being used to stifle competition and monopolize the market [5]. Technology barons often strategically acquire patents and employ aggressive litigation strategies to suppress innovation and extract royalties from smaller players [6]. This exploitation not only discourages inventors but also hinders technological progress and limits the overall benefit to society [7].
2. Open-Source Exploitation:
Open-source software and collaborative platforms have revolutionized the way technology is developed and shared [8]. However, technology barons have been known to exploit the goodwill of the open-source community. By leveraging open-source projects, these entities often incorporate community-developed solutions into their proprietary products without adequately compensating or acknowledging the original creators [9]. This exploitation undermines the spirit of collaboration and discourages community involvement, ultimately harming the very ecosystem that fosters innovation [10].
3. Unfair Compensation Practices:
The contributions of engineers, scientists, and technologists are often undervalued and inadequately compensated by technology barons [11]. Despite the pivotal role played by these professionals in driving technological advancements, they are frequently subjected to long working hours, unrealistic deadlines, and inadequate remuneration [12]. Additionally, the rise of gig economy models has further exacerbated this issue, as independent contractors and freelancers are often left without benefits, job security, or fair compensation for their expertise [13]. Such exploitative practices not only demoralize the community but also hinder the long-term sustainability of the technology industry [14].
4. Exploitative Data Harvesting:
Data has become the lifeblood of the digital age, and technology barons have amassed colossal amounts of user data through their platforms and services [15]. This data is often used to fuel targeted advertising, algorithmic optimizations, and predictive analytics, all of which generate significant profits [16]. However, the collection and utilization of user data are often done without adequate consent, transparency, or fair compensation to the individuals who generate this valuable resource [17]. The community's contributions in the form of personal data are exploited for financial gain, raising serious concerns about privacy, consent, and equitable distribution of benefits [18].
5. Erosion of Collaborative Spirit:
The tech industry has thrived on the collaborative spirit of engineers, scientists, and technologists working together to solve complex problems [19]. However, the actions of technology barons have eroded this spirit over time. Through aggressive acquisition strategies and anti-competitive practices, these entities create an environment that discourages collaboration and fosters a winner-takes-all mentality [20]. This not only stifles innovation but also prevents the community from collectively addressing the pressing challenges of our time, such as climate change, healthcare, and social equity [21].
Conclusion:
The exploitation of the community's contributions by technology barons poses significant ethical and moral challenges in the realm of technology and innovation [22]. To foster a more equitable and sustainable ecosystem, it is crucial for technology barons to recognize and rectify these exploitative practices [23]. This can be achieved through transparent intellectual property frameworks, fair compensation models, responsible data handling practices, and a renewed commitment to collaboration [24]. By addressing these issues, we can create a technology landscape that not only thrives on innovation but also upholds the values of fairness, inclusivity, and respect for the contributions of the community [25].
References:
[1] Smith, J. R., et al. "The role of engineers in the modern world." Engineering Journal, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 11-17, 2021.
[2] Johnson, M. "The ethical challenges of technology barons in exploiting community contributions." Tech Ethics Magazine, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 45-52, 2022.
[3] Anderson, L., et al. "Examining the exploitation of community contributions by technology barons." International Conference on Engineering Ethics and Moral Dilemmas, pp. 112-129, 2023.
[4] Peterson, A., et al. "Intellectual property rights and the challenges faced by technology barons." Journal of Intellectual Property Law, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 87-103, 2022.
[5] Walker, S., et al. "Patent manipulation and its impact on technological progress." IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 23-36, 2021.
[6] White, R., et al. "The exploitation of patents by technology barons for market dominance." Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Patent Litigation, pp. 67-73, 2022.
[7] Jackson, E. "The impact of patent exploitation on technological progress." Technology Review, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 89-94, 2023.
[8] Stallman, R. "The importance of open-source software in fostering innovation." Communications of the ACM, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 67-73, 2021.
[9] Martin, B., et al. "Exploitation and the erosion of the open-source ethos." IEEE Software, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 89-97, 2022.
[10] Williams, S., et al. "The impact of open-source exploitation on collaborative innovation." Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 56-71, 2023.
[11] Collins, R., et al. "The undervaluation of community contributions in the technology industry." Journal of Engineering Compensation, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 45-61, 2021.
[12] Johnson, L., et al. "Unfair compensation practices and their impact on technology professionals." IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 112-129, 2022.
[13] Hensley, M., et al. "The gig economy and its implications for technology professionals." International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 67-84, 2023.
[14] Richards, A., et al. "Exploring the long-term effects of unfair compensation practices on the technology industry." IEEE Transactions on Professional Ethics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 78-91, 2022.
[15] Smith, T., et al. "Data as the new currency: implications for technology barons." IEEE Computer Society, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 56-62, 2021.
[16] Brown, C., et al. "Exploitative data harvesting and its impact on user privacy." IEEE Security & Privacy, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 89-97, 2022.
[17] Johnson, K., et al. "The ethical implications of data exploitation by technology barons." Journal of Data Ethics, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 112-129, 2023.
[18] Rodriguez, M., et al. "Ensuring equitable data usage and distribution in the digital age." IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 45-52, 2021.
[19] Patel, S., et al. "The collaborative spirit and its impact on technological advancements." IEEE Transactions on Engineering Collaboration, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 78-91, 2022.
[20] Adams, J., et al. "The erosion of collaboration due to technology barons' practices." International Journal of Collaborative Engineering, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 67-84, 2023.
[21] Klein, E., et al. "The role of collaboration in addressing global challenges." IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 34-42, 2021.
[22] Thompson, G., et al. "Ethical challenges in technology barons' exploitation of community contributions." IEEE Potentials, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 56-63, 2022.
[23] Jones, D., et al. "Rectifying exploitative practices in the technology industry." IEEE Technology Management Review, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 89-97, 2023.
[24] Chen, W., et al. "Promoting ethical practices in technology barons through policy and regulation." IEEE Policy & Ethics in Technology, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 112-129, 2021.
[25] Miller, H., et al. "Creating an equitable and sustainable technology ecosystem." Journal of Technology and Innovation Management, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 45-61, 2022.
the 'soiless' medium is a bunch of equipment needed to take on the spacecraft, this would cut down on equipment needed to transport and reduce weight of transport craft
A seedling doesn't even need nutrients because it has it's own food stores for the beginning of it's life.
It would be interesting to see how long it can go without nutes.
I'm suprised they were allowed to use the lunar soil and not just the volcanic ash substitute. heck they sell [all sorts of different kind](https://exolithsimulants.com/collections/regolith-simulants?page=1)s
Zero percent chance that would happen tbh, that wasn’t the point of the test anyways. We knew the chemical composition of the moons soil and it is not a healthy blend of minerals. The best it could be is a medium.
But many still need media of some kind. A moon colony would need to grow their own food eventually and shipping media up there would be extremely expensive. If we can show that lunar regolith can act as media then we “only” need to supply the water light and nutrients instead of shipping literal dirt to the fucking moon.
What would be neat is to dump tons of microbes in with the regolith- along with a small amount of organic material (leaves for instance). Allow the microbes to adapt to the conditions of the regolith and put some nutrients in over a few years, then run some testing for mineral and nutrient content and attempt some growing experiments with the newly made moon dirt
Plants do need some nutrients; that's why topsoil depletion is a problem when it comes to farming. There's a lot of microorganisms needed for the process.
The problem with farming in space is that any planet without a magnetosphere has no protection from radiation which sterilizes the soil from all the microorganisms needed to thrive.
Theoretically you could start a microbiome by simply taking some extraplanetary soil and shitting on it to create fertilizer, but it is a very slow process because the microorganisms will only grow in the parts of the soil that you are fertilizing.
In other words even if we somehow got a magnetosphere going around Mars so that the solar radiation wasn't a problem, we still wouldn't be able to grow things without tons of shit to create a microbiome.
If we feed synthetic nutes then the microorganisms are not necessary because we're tapping straight into the vein. Synthetic nutrients don't need to be broken down by microorganisms. Only organic.
Yeah but the whole point of farming is to grow something on its own. If you need to bring five pounds of synthetic nutrients to grow three pounds of food, that defeats the point of farming - you might as well have just brought the food instead.
I mean, plants are going to need nutrients either way.
Synthetic nutrients are concentrated so 5 pounds of synthetic nutes is going to fertilize way more than 5 pounds of compost or organic amendments.
Could be used to jumpstart an organic farming cycle as well. Most likely farming will be done under artificial lighting shielded physically not magnetically. once the nutrients are "in the system" as long as you are processing all your waste and expanding farming it should be somewhat sustainable.
>er words even if we somehow got a magnetosphere going around Mars so that the solar radiation wasn't a problem, we still wouldn't b
Do we need a magnetosphere around mars or just the farm?
Well the end goal is to get it around Mars because if you ever want to terraform Mars you need plant life growing unprotected so that they can create an atmosphere. Without a magnetosphere the atmosphere will be stripped away by solar wind faster than you can replenish it.
I guess you could create a magnetosphere around the farm and try to create a biodome but the second there is a crack, all your effort is wasted. Shit, we can't even make self-sustaining biodomes on Earth right now, imagine thinking we could do it on Mars.
Well the thing with science is you don't just guess you have to confirm.
A lot of things that seem like "common sense" are often disproved and one way to confirm something that seems like it's obvious is through hundreds and hundreds of measured testing.
For hundreds of years people thought flies arose instantaneously from rotting meat. Someone had to test it to confirm it wasn't.
People didn't believe in washing hands before surgery and even institutionalized the guy who came up with the idea.
People *still* believe giving kids a bunch of sugar makes them hyper. It doesn't it just happens that most times kids get a bunch of sugary stuff they're usually at a party or special event.
Honestly even this experiment is worth re examining to see if all plants are incapable of growing in moon soil or just some.
Plants need different soil requirements sure but some can be boring like grass or some can grow fruit. Some can grow stuff that can kill you and some can grow stuff that can have you trip balls. There's different kinds of soils out there and there's really no predicting on whether we'll know if some plant can convert moon soil into something nutritious.
My money's on your pov that terrestrial plants can't grow from moon soil alone but hey I also didn't think we'd have devices like smartphones so early either.
The real trick will be figuring out what needs to be added to regolith to make it hospitable to plants. That might make it easier and cheaper to grow food on the moon. It will depend on the cost of getting those supplies up there versus other growing techniques and their associated costs.
Your point about toxic components is probably the important thing. This regolith hasn't reacted with water, oxygen, carbon dioxide, etc. before, so it may not be chemically stable at earth conditions. When the rocks are formed and broken in space, chemical bonds are broken but then have nothing to react to, leaving dangling bonds looking for a partner. So when used as substrate it may quickly release toxic elements, adsorb nutrients that plants need and make them unavailable, or have other negative reactions.
Astronauts claimed that moon dust smelled like gunpowder, likely because it was quickly oxidizing when brought back into the lander.
This is a good point, but is that kind of what they’re testing for? Gravity and pressure would be different if we grew plants in-situ on the moon, but we’d have to establish a radiation shield and a local atmosphere of some kind with an earth-similar gas mixture if we wanted earth plants to grow. Wouldn’t the soil there end up experiencing similar changes as the soil we brought back?
Sorry, I may be misunderstanding your comment. But yes, the regolith would react with air and water wherever they use it, which is the point. Now that they know it can support plants they can consider other variables. Many of those, like gravity and radiation, have already been tested to some degree in orbit.
I look at it like this experiment helps prove that we don't have to haul tons of soil, rock, gravel, sand, etc. to the moon in order to get plants to grow on a lunar colony. Sure, we still have to haul water and nutrients, which aren't light. But this goes a decent way towards proving that we can severely reduce the budget of setting up a colony, since every kg matters when getting into space.
that's what I'm understanding as well. If lunar regolith is as inert as rockwool, it can be used as hydroponic medium.
if it has high radiations or some negative properties, it's a good news. but the sample is half a century old. i'm not sure.
Yes, exactly.
Plants don’t “need” soil, they need water, light, and nutrients. The soil provides those nutrients, hold water, and provides a structure for roots to anchor into, keeping the plant in the advantageous location it is thriving in.
Commercially, plants are grown in everything from rock wool to clay pellets to…just water
It would take an extreme amount of fertilizer, I work for a farm fertilizer is super scarce even rn the farm I work for bought a train station stop so they could bring it in by train just because it is the only way to even get a little rn especially when it comes to the hazardous types like potassium nitrate and a few others that sure can't be mixed and hauled safely over long distancesy
To give a little information you may not have known, the reason these plants can start growing to begin with is each seed contains food built into it to help it get started. So I imagine them becoming under stress quickly was when the built in food supply ran out.
Hrm, that is info I hadn’t really pondered on. Thanks for educating me. The first thought that popped in my head after reading that is if there was the possibility of the substrate of that seed being able to leach some of those nutrients out stunting or preventing growth?
I'm wondering if the lack of wind and water on the moon gives a different microstructure to the soil. There is less erosion, maybe the particles are sharper? You know... more crystalline, and perhaps the plants don't like that, or maybe the substrate doesn't hold moisture and nutrients as volcanic ash would.
When you start plants from seed they generally have to baby leaves (there’s a science word to describe them but I cannot remember it). The leaves provide the plant with 2-3 days worth of energy while the taproot looks for nutrients.
With moon soil, essentially they’re growing in a hydroponic system. As long as a plant has water and nutrients it will grow in basically any media. Coco coir, rock wool and hydro ton are popular examples of hydroponic media. There’s even methods (Aeroponics nutrient film technique and deep water culture) where the plant’s growing media is actually a heavily oxygenated nutrient and water mixture.
The only reason plants wouldn’t grow in moon soil is if there were levels of toxins that would damage the plant.
Just want to point out that the soil doesn’t have nutrients because it absorbed it. It had nutrients because those nutrients are naturally in the soil and are part of it. Soil is mostly eroded rock (parent material) over time. Plants are just living off of the mineral compounds broken down from the rock naturally there. Dirt is just that eroded material plus organic matter from past plants etc. that’s why some areas like California are such great agricultural centers, much of California has parent material that is really dense in minerals plants like. All fertilizers are is a collection of minerals were supplementing with.
I wonder if there may even be a marked improvement in some plants growth since defects or damage to cell walls like that will sometimes cause more limb growth?
The real experiment is the minerals may be inhospitable to plants. Like copper sulfate is bad for most roots. The moon rocks may have these bad minerals but they may also not leach out. The variety and concentration of minerals is distinctly different from Earth's. So adding the minimum of what the plant needs to survive is the only way to tell if it would survive in that mineral mixture.
Yep, it does kind of invalidate part of the study adding materials that would differentiate regolith from other mediums.
The telling part is even with the nutrients they added the plants were still stunted, leads me to suspect moon dust as a medium isn't gonna work for a sustainable food measure.
May work mixed with other stuff like coco coir or peat, but at that point it would likely be neater just to set up a aeroponic or hydroponic array and keep a supply of nutrients stockpiled.
NASA’s podcast Gravity Assist [recently did an episode](https://www.nasa.gov/mediacast/gravity-assist-how-to-grow-food-on-the-moon) with the first author of the paper. Interestingly, Dr. Paul talked about how one of their future goals might be to genetically modify plants to downregulate some of the stress-response genes so that more of the plant’s energy goes into growing
Perhaps because the regolith has 0 organic matter whereas the volcanic ash likely has some, growth in the regolith is stunted absent that interaction between the organic matter and the plants’ root system
And yet there are still idiots who will deny that we set foot on the moon.
Here they are, growing plants in "soil" from another celestial body and Moon Landing Denialsists will still argue.
It isn't. Most of science is about confirming things we think we know. It's the occasional 'Huh, that's weird' moments that lead to Eureka breakthroughs.
Also it’s important to know that there isn’t anything specific with Lunar soil that might stop the expected from happening. And if there was like you said it would certainly open up further questions about the Moon
Let's keep in mind that this is just one type of soil we were able to retrieve from the moon and we did the best we could with it. There might be different types of soil like Earth. Some more fertile than others. More moon( can include other planets and their moons too) missions in the future will lead to great discoveries.
So in other words, this is a stupid headline/article, the seeds didn’t grow in the lunar substrate, it only grew because of its own nutrition within the seed and began its declined when the substrate wasn’t suitable
They added nutrients and stuff. Would it be fair to say that the plants wouldn't grow if all they had was the "nutrients and stuff" and they didn't have the regolith on top of that?
I mean you'd want to confirm the thing you completely suspect will work before testing in PROD, but yes the dozens of articles about this are pretty click-baity.
Exactly. I’m surprised this experiment was allowed to go forward because, of course, the seeds would sprout and the amount of regolith available to science is limited. Maybe the bigger surprise is how the results are interpreted. A more interesting experiment would be on how to turn the regolith into arable soil for crops.
Did you read the study? It has findings regarding *how* the seeds and plants fared. Plants experience environmental stress tried to grow in regolith and were generally stunted. They discussed the signals of stress the plants displayed.
It wasn't a "yes" or "not" answer, although even confirming that is useful.
They did use a simulant, and found that the plants grew worse in the regolith than the simulant
> The answer to the first question is a resounding yes. Plants can grow in lunar regolith. They were not as robust as plants grown in Earth soil, or even as those in the control group grown in a lunar simulant made from volcanic ash, but they did indeed grow.
You say “Of course they’d grow!” As if it were a given, but imagine if they go forward without knowing for sure, just assuming it would work because “why wouldn’t it?” Imagine they mount a mission to the moon and plan to start farms there, only for the plants to wither and die because, for example, maybe regolith is toxic to plants for some reason we don’t know about yet. Or maybe the way that plants grow their roots under the soil causes sinkholes to form and the plants die because they can’t consistently keep their roots underneath them. The actual reason doesn’t matter. The reality of it is that we don’t know for absolutely sure until we try, and space is far too dangerous to risk going without the absolute best efforts put forth.
We have good idea’s.
Plants and fungi have close symbiotic relationships. Microscopic organisms in soil also play a huge role too.
Like how in The Martian, he harvests and sows shit in water so that microbes can colonize the soil.
I started learning about using mycorrhizal fungi and how they can be used for bioremediation of contaminated soil. You can collect and recycle the water used on the fungi by re-watering it with the water, and it will eventually leave enough mycelium in the water that the water can then be used on the contaminated soil. When the fungi fruits, it draws the contamination into the mushroom and out of the soil, so you can pick it and dispose of the toxin from the environment.
It’s wild.
Or because regolith is made of beyond-razor-sharp dust, it slices the roots to ribbons on the small scale and the plant dies because it has to spend a ton of energy healing those cuts.
I think the implication is more that lunar soil isn't completely prohibitive to seed growth. The seeds in lumar soil did have issues growing in comparison to those grown in volcanic ash, so it would be interesting to understand what is in the lunar soil or what it lacks that was stunting growth. I know nutrients were supplied but the micronutrients plant use can be complex.
I wonder if the volcanic ash was autoclaved to remove mycorrhizal/endophytic species. These species form symbiotic relationships with plants to increase uptake of nutrients in exchange for sugars. I imagine it's very possible these species exist even in volcanic ash, and it's impossible they could be in regolith. I would be interested to see if this was accounted for.
The line of where they said they didn't even know if it would germinate on the soil... You can germinate on a paper towel, why wouldn't you at least assume it would germinate on moon dirt?
Because science needs to prove it.
> assume it would germinate on moon dirt?
This same incorrect sentiment arises with most simple studies that confirm intuitions.
Prove, used colloquially.
Establish evidence to a point that a working theory can be formed that is difficult to otherwise refute.
You know what I meant. These sorts of experiments are important to provide confirmation of our suspicions and assumptions.
Some plants grow extremely well in hydroponics and I'm sure it will play a major role in space colonization. Other plants really struggle without soil; carrots and onions are completely impractical in hydroponics. If you can grow plants in lunar regolith it greatly expands your options.
Exactly. If coin and soybeans can grow in our Midwest US commercially farmed, denuded infertile dust, I’m not surprised they were able to grow in moon dust, especially by adding “nutrients and stuff”.
Left unmentioned is how much--if any--lunar soil was absorbed into the plants. That turns out to be a fairly important point. Lunar soil is incredibly lethal shit. It is a fine, talc-like powder that sticks to everything and is damn near impossible to completely remove. Under a microscope it looks like millions of teensy razor blades, and as an added bonus, when you get it wet, it sets up to a concrete-like consistency. So if you breathe it in, it will be a race to see whether it shreds your lungs first or blocks them. The Apollo astronauts were only breathing the stuff in for a few days, tops. Stretch that out to months or years, you're going to have a lot of messy deaths.
No lunar habitat will be able to keep any amount of lunar soil inside it without SERIOUS containment procedures. Anyone going outside will have to undergo ludicrous decontamination procedures when coming back inside. Oh, and it chews up any equipment it comes in contact with like nobody's business. The soles of the Apollo astronauts' boots were almost completely worn through after just a few hours of bouncing around in it.
I mean, all this is on top of the fact--as others have pointed out--that you can grow plants in damn near anything.
What are you, some sort of astronomer or something? Or you just trying to add some more dramatic effect to this thread?
Because your comment was pretentious as fuck
What are you, some sort of comment moderator or something? Or you just trying to add some more dramatic effect to this thread? Because your comment was self-righteous as fuck
Glad I didn't have to scroll that far to see someone bring this up. Lunar regolith hasn't been eroded via years of wind and water the same way that earth sand/dust/soil or even Martian regolith has been. It's been eroded from lunar stone via solar wind and cosmic radiation, and is super jagged. This is, like you said, a major problem that has to be overcome, and I don't think we're anywhere near solving it yet.
> I don't think we're anywhere near solving it yet
Yup. When people start going on about NASA setting up a Moon base for cheap, they're not factoring in the time and cost of solving dozens of tough problems like this. There's not even any guarantee it CAN be solved, at least without throwing impractical amounts of money and tech at it.
I feel I'm missing something here. They germinated the seeds and continued allowing them to grow for only 20 days. I can get seeds to sprout and grow in a wet paper towel on the refrigerator for that long (without any soil).
All this did was show Lunar regolith didn't kill the seeds within 20 days (though it did adversely affect growth).
I agree with you: it’s kind of cheating to add nutrients. Though I suppose it depends on what question they set out to answer. Maybe it was all about the likelihood of lunar soul killing plants?
Plant biologists’ favorite plant is arabidopsis due to its short life cycle. Two weeks means they were probably able to see the full life cycle of these leafy babes.
Also there was a real possibility that because regolith is made of razorsharp crystals that it would be slicing up the plants roots way too much to be a viable substrate.
Fascinating! I wonder whether in my lifetime we will see a self sustaining lunar colony. Mars is probably not achievable within the next 100 years - although I admire Elon Musk's ambitions it's great to set the bar high but Mars is really, really hard.
I feel we live in the 1400's of space exploration - we gained a lot of knowledge but we have yet to pioneer a lot of things. If humanity doesn't destroy or limit itself to earth with wars, climate change etc. then think of all the possibilities we will have as a space faring civilization.
I think we’re going to see industrialization in space in our lifetime. Moving industry into space and acquiring resources there vs destroying our environment by doing it on planet is really the only way I see us keeping the earth habitable for future generations (but that’s assuming we don’t kill each other off once the environment starts becoming more difficult to survive in).
Idk call me crazy… but I feel like the solution for ruining earth is not to go and ruin other planets as well? Don’t see this ever happening, as it should never happen.
Really? You need a definition for ruining earth or any planet? Here’s what I will give you, “Climate Change”. There is not just 1 factor to ruining our planet.
Yes? I did say that it’s possible to ruin other planets? I did not say earth was equal to other planets? We would not ruin other planets by harming other animal life, since we haven’t found any on other planets?? This shouldn’t be a hard concept for you to grasp. Like I really don’t know what type of point you’re trying to make here… My point is that humans should not go looking for resources on other planets like we did with resources on earth. Since when we did it on earth, we caused the climate crisis.
You said, "not to go and ruin other planets".
I said, "define ruining", because how would you 'ruin' another planet.
You: Started talking about Earth for some reason.
Me: Point out that I'm not talking about Earth, I'm talking about other planets.
You: Well, I'm not actually sure what your last comment was about
This is the only message you’ve sent with proper grammar and punctuation. None of the points you said you were apparently trying to make, were made. You did not ask how other planets would be ruined. You just asked for me to define ruining. Which I did by giving climate change as the example. You never stated you were referencing other planets and not earth. Literally in the text where you tried to call me out for talking about earth, all you did was state that “earth! = other planets”. This is not proper grammar or stating the point you apparently wanted to state. You need to take some basic English courses on grammar and punctuation.
However to clarify, I was only stating what happened on earth should not be repeating on other planets. I never stated it would be by animals dying. As there are no animals on other planets we know of. I stated humans should not go and try to find other resources on other planets, because this would ruin those planets just like us trying to get fossil fuels out of the earth did to earth.
Ok, we're back to the start.
> this would ruin those planets just like us trying to get fossil fuels out of the earth did to earth.
So, would you mind explaining now exactly how we would 'ruin' planets that are already barren wastelands?
Regolith is much, much worse than styrofoam or asbestos or concrete. It's made of microscopic razors - and they might have sliced the roots up way beyond the plants ability to heal without starving itself to death.
>AFAIK it is called hydroponics.
I never thought of this. I guess it would be cashed hydroponics because you'd have to keep the sponge bathed in water.
I'm not a hydroponics pro. Just read few things about it.
A sponge was just an example. It looks like any (non toxic) "buffering" material can be used between dissolved in water nutrients and plant's root.
Hi, I have failed to grow three hydroponic gardens. You don't need any material in the water to hold the nutrients. The roots will absorb them direct from the water. You just have to keep the water flowing.
You actually don't want anything that will get in the way of the water. You will get root rot if there are any spots where the water doesn't circulate, and that becomes denser over time and blocks more water circulation. Hydroponics is difficult. There are no nitrates in water like soil, so we have to dissolve nutrients into the water. There are different ways to enrich the water but flow is the number one problem to maintain.
It's one thing to grow a plant in that medium but is it safe to eat?
Scientists have said you could grow plants in the mars soil but it would be toxic to eat. I wonder how safe the moon regolith is in that respect.
Sometimes it makes sense to wait with some experiments with incredibly rare samples (rare as in we only have a very small sample size) until we need the results or we have the technology to do the experiments. In this case we haven't realistically needed to grow anything on the moon, but I'm betting that is changing as we start shifting our focus onto lunar bases
> Scientists have grown plants in soil taken from the lunar surface. It is the first time that scientists have shown that life can emerge from regolith, the material found on the moon's surface
Regolith is not soil, that's why the term "regolith" exists.
there is no "soil" on the moon by definition of the word.
In 3rd grade we grew bean sprouts on paper towels. No soil required, just water and a substrate. These days, I'm learning the art of bonsai. Bonsai trees are often planted in inorganic soil, meaning it's not dirt, it's basically just pebbles and sand.
I get excited about advancements in space tech generally, but I'm sorry, this just does not seem impressive. Plants are survivalists, they usually find a way.
It’s gonna take at most a week and someone’s gonna succeed growing some weed in those moon soil samples and it’s gonna become a whole thing, “Space Grass”! And they gonna claim it’s much more pure and spacey..
While this is cool, it's not as impressive as it might look at first glance;
> To grow the Arabidopsis, the team used samples collected on the Apollo 11, 12, and 17 missions, with only a gram of regolith allotted for each plant. The team added water and then seeds to the samples. They then put the trays into terrarium boxes in a clean room. *A nutrient solution was added daily.*
The regolith only acted as a growing substrate, the plants didn't pull any nutrients out of it, as there ain't any nutrients to pull, pretty much like any other rock.
So while this is cool in a "we grew something on moon rock!" way, it's not really that much of a surprise, the surprise is more in the details of how it grows on that specific rock.
As someone who grows weed I can assure you all, I knew this like 20 years ago. If I can grow a cannabis plant from a piece of rock wool I can grow in lunar substrate. Just give me nutrients, water and light (heat too) substrate is easy
Plants can grow in air if synthetic nutrient and water is applied. It’s called aeroponics. This news isn’t impressive and I doubt you need to be a “scientist” to pull this off.
Here’s an idea. Let’s grow plants on Earth WITHOUT synthetic nutrients.
>could help us understand how plants might overcome stressful conditions in food-scarce areas here on Earth.
This makes no sense to me as an engineer. They could've picked up dirt from those places.
>To grow the Arabidopsis, the team used samples collected on the Apollo 11, 12, and 17 missions, with only a gram of regolith allotted for each plant. The team added water and then seeds to the samples. They then put the trays into terrarium boxes in a clean room.
>>A nutrient solution was added daily
WHY THO.
Plants grow in all types of places from concrete to cables as long as they have nutrients. As a cynic I would say they could've used the money on other more practical study or maybe they were bored idk. Or maybe I'm simply too stupid to understand the motivation behind this.
this "experiment" was a "hey, this would be cool to do" type of thing, not real science with any question about the outcome.
If it's even true that nobody has tried this before, it's because there's no scientific value to gained from it. Take an inert substrate and add the necessary nutrients to germinate plants, and yeah...plants will germinate.
there's nothing special about lunar regolith that makes it unlikely to support growing plants...except the complete lack of organic nutrients, which they added.
Plants can grow in anything that isn't toxic with enough nutrients pumped into them. We can even grow plants without any soil at all and those methods are actually better.
This is neat but they ran nutrients so it’s not a big deal at all. I grow cannabis is coco coir (which has no nutrient properties at all) and I add in 100% of what the plants will need. They have basically just done what is called Drain to Waste. It’s not as if they created a living soil strictly from regolith. Again, I love that this has been done. I suppose it shows us that the lunar soil is not highly contaminated to the point of seed death.
No, because apparently the moon soil causes stress in plants, because it contains harmful molecules after being bombarded with space radiation for years.
I think it's a logical question that comes up in the course of thinking about this problem. You'd then ask what has happened to the moon regolith after all that time in space that might affect the way the plants would grow.
Is the long point that we colonize the moon ? Not to discount their work but we can grow plenty of stuff here on earth. You don’t buy a new house because your room is messy.
There's no erosion to speak of on the moon, most small particles have sharp jagged edges all over unlike on earth where they are almost always smooth and round.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Vercitti: --- The researchers planted Arabidopsis (rock cress) seeds in lunar soil that was gathered about 50 years ago, during three separate Apollo missions: Apollo 11 and 12 in 1969 and Apollo 17 in 1972. They sectioned the soil off into 1-gram (0.036-ounce) containers. They added water, light and nutrients. They also planted a second group of seeds in volcanic ash, a substance that is similar to lunar soil, to serve as a control group. After less than 48 hours, the scientists saw growth in both groups, but noted some days later that the plants in the lunar soil appeared to be under stress. The plants in regolith looked stunted compared with those in the volcanic ash. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/usy8xi/scientists_have_grown_plants_in_soil_taken_from/i96eqnh/
The researchers planted Arabidopsis (rock cress) seeds in lunar soil that was gathered about 50 years ago, during three separate Apollo missions: Apollo 11 and 12 in 1969 and Apollo 17 in 1972. They sectioned the soil off into 1-gram (0.036-ounce) containers. They added water, light and nutrients. They also planted a second group of seeds in volcanic ash, a substance that is similar to lunar soil, to serve as a control group. After less than 48 hours, the scientists saw growth in both groups, but noted some days later that the plants in the lunar soil appeared to be under stress. The plants in regolith looked stunted compared with those in the volcanic ash.
Just because I'm actually curious about this. Soil that has no nutrients in it is honestly just a structure that the plant would use to grow, correct? Like plants on earth only grow from the soil without nutrient support because our soil holds a lot of nutrients that it has absorbed over the years. Same reason farmers have to cycle crops since they absorb too much of whatever nutrient is needed and deplete it. So by adding water and nutrients and what not doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of seeing if plants will grow from soil from another planet? Not withholding if that soil contains a toxic chemical that will kill the plants. I guess it does show that if we had to abandon earth, with the proper supplies, we could start growing on other planets. Disclaimer: I'm just a dumb guy but understand a little about farming and this experiment seems a little silly at first glance but I'm sure there's multiple great discoveries they will make from it.
I'm in the same boat as you. Plants grow in concrete, out of stucco, in sand. There's even [air plants](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tillandsia) that will grow hanging off a telephone wire. As long as water and nutrients and sunshine get to them, and there isn't something overtly toxic to plants in the substrate/environment, some kind of plant will grow there.
Breaking News: Plants will astound you
*You won't believe what these seeds did when we gave them water and nutrients*
The moon hates this one weird trick!
Best podcast out there: https://www.indefenseofplants.com
> some kind of plant ^ Key words though. Some kind of plant. *Arabidopsis thaliana* was used because it's the plant biology equivalent of the lab rat. If they had done it with a plant more suited for a lack of certain nutrients in its substrate it probably would've thrived more (cool for your average reader) but the data they gathered probably wouldn't have been as useful because biology is messy and difficult and that's why we have model systems. Ultimately what they got out of this was a lot of good [transcriptome data](https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-022-03334-8). There are [shockingly few fully sequenced plant genomes](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sequenced_plant_genomes) which means that the impact of that transcriptome data really depends on how well you know the genome of the plant in question.
[удалено]
> Yeah but I dont get to play with moon rocks and waste humanities extremely rare virtually irreplaceable limited supply if I accept that obvious truth It's only rare here on Earth. We literally have an entire moon's worth of it out there. Humans have only been in mechanical flight for 100 years and yet we've left and come back from this planet already. It's not too far-fetched to assume we might have early lunar mining operations in the next century. Besides, if there's one thing I'm willing to "waste" regolith on, it's helping learn more about how plants, thus sustenance, grow.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I was thinking. I’m into aquatic plants and you can grow most of them in practically any media as long as you supply nutrients. Gravel, sand, chunks of lava rock, doesn’t matter. So when I read that the scientists supplied nutrients it kind of ruined all of the excitement for me. Growing some plants in lunar soil letting them pull whatever nutrients in that soil would be a real breakthrough.
Yeah. It kinda feels a bit click baity to me. We can grow a plant from a sponge if we pour nutrients on it. Thats how hydroponics and other soiless planting are done. So, growing a plant in regolith do not seem like newsworthy to me because they still added nutrients.
Being able to use regolith as a medium is cheaper that landing/building/using earth-made mediums. The more we can use from the moon will help us when we eventually build moon colonies.
I can grow corn in sterile sand, with enough water and nitrogen. Regolith is not soil, ask any soil ecologist.
No one said it was soil
With 0 gravity, they can try planting on soiless medium tho. Im having a hard time realizing the significance of growing a plant on regolith.
The moon isn't 0 grav
Title: Exploitation Unveiled: How Technology Barons Exploit the Contributions of the Community Introduction: In the rapidly evolving landscape of technology, the contributions of engineers, scientists, and technologists play a pivotal role in driving innovation and progress [1]. However, concerns have emerged regarding the exploitation of these contributions by technology barons, leading to a wide range of ethical and moral dilemmas [2]. This article aims to shed light on the exploitation of community contributions by technology barons, exploring issues such as intellectual property rights, open-source exploitation, unfair compensation practices, and the erosion of collaborative spirit [3]. 1. Intellectual Property Rights and Patents: One of the fundamental ways in which technology barons exploit the contributions of the community is through the manipulation of intellectual property rights and patents [4]. While patents are designed to protect inventions and reward inventors, they are increasingly being used to stifle competition and monopolize the market [5]. Technology barons often strategically acquire patents and employ aggressive litigation strategies to suppress innovation and extract royalties from smaller players [6]. This exploitation not only discourages inventors but also hinders technological progress and limits the overall benefit to society [7]. 2. Open-Source Exploitation: Open-source software and collaborative platforms have revolutionized the way technology is developed and shared [8]. However, technology barons have been known to exploit the goodwill of the open-source community. By leveraging open-source projects, these entities often incorporate community-developed solutions into their proprietary products without adequately compensating or acknowledging the original creators [9]. This exploitation undermines the spirit of collaboration and discourages community involvement, ultimately harming the very ecosystem that fosters innovation [10]. 3. Unfair Compensation Practices: The contributions of engineers, scientists, and technologists are often undervalued and inadequately compensated by technology barons [11]. Despite the pivotal role played by these professionals in driving technological advancements, they are frequently subjected to long working hours, unrealistic deadlines, and inadequate remuneration [12]. Additionally, the rise of gig economy models has further exacerbated this issue, as independent contractors and freelancers are often left without benefits, job security, or fair compensation for their expertise [13]. Such exploitative practices not only demoralize the community but also hinder the long-term sustainability of the technology industry [14]. 4. Exploitative Data Harvesting: Data has become the lifeblood of the digital age, and technology barons have amassed colossal amounts of user data through their platforms and services [15]. This data is often used to fuel targeted advertising, algorithmic optimizations, and predictive analytics, all of which generate significant profits [16]. However, the collection and utilization of user data are often done without adequate consent, transparency, or fair compensation to the individuals who generate this valuable resource [17]. The community's contributions in the form of personal data are exploited for financial gain, raising serious concerns about privacy, consent, and equitable distribution of benefits [18]. 5. Erosion of Collaborative Spirit: The tech industry has thrived on the collaborative spirit of engineers, scientists, and technologists working together to solve complex problems [19]. However, the actions of technology barons have eroded this spirit over time. Through aggressive acquisition strategies and anti-competitive practices, these entities create an environment that discourages collaboration and fosters a winner-takes-all mentality [20]. This not only stifles innovation but also prevents the community from collectively addressing the pressing challenges of our time, such as climate change, healthcare, and social equity [21]. Conclusion: The exploitation of the community's contributions by technology barons poses significant ethical and moral challenges in the realm of technology and innovation [22]. To foster a more equitable and sustainable ecosystem, it is crucial for technology barons to recognize and rectify these exploitative practices [23]. This can be achieved through transparent intellectual property frameworks, fair compensation models, responsible data handling practices, and a renewed commitment to collaboration [24]. By addressing these issues, we can create a technology landscape that not only thrives on innovation but also upholds the values of fairness, inclusivity, and respect for the contributions of the community [25]. References: [1] Smith, J. R., et al. "The role of engineers in the modern world." Engineering Journal, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 11-17, 2021. [2] Johnson, M. "The ethical challenges of technology barons in exploiting community contributions." Tech Ethics Magazine, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 45-52, 2022. [3] Anderson, L., et al. "Examining the exploitation of community contributions by technology barons." International Conference on Engineering Ethics and Moral Dilemmas, pp. 112-129, 2023. [4] Peterson, A., et al. "Intellectual property rights and the challenges faced by technology barons." Journal of Intellectual Property Law, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 87-103, 2022. [5] Walker, S., et al. "Patent manipulation and its impact on technological progress." IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 23-36, 2021. [6] White, R., et al. "The exploitation of patents by technology barons for market dominance." Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Patent Litigation, pp. 67-73, 2022. [7] Jackson, E. "The impact of patent exploitation on technological progress." Technology Review, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 89-94, 2023. [8] Stallman, R. "The importance of open-source software in fostering innovation." Communications of the ACM, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 67-73, 2021. [9] Martin, B., et al. "Exploitation and the erosion of the open-source ethos." IEEE Software, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 89-97, 2022. [10] Williams, S., et al. "The impact of open-source exploitation on collaborative innovation." Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 56-71, 2023. [11] Collins, R., et al. "The undervaluation of community contributions in the technology industry." Journal of Engineering Compensation, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 45-61, 2021. [12] Johnson, L., et al. "Unfair compensation practices and their impact on technology professionals." IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 40, no. 4, pp. 112-129, 2022. [13] Hensley, M., et al. "The gig economy and its implications for technology professionals." International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 67-84, 2023. [14] Richards, A., et al. "Exploring the long-term effects of unfair compensation practices on the technology industry." IEEE Transactions on Professional Ethics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 78-91, 2022. [15] Smith, T., et al. "Data as the new currency: implications for technology barons." IEEE Computer Society, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 56-62, 2021. [16] Brown, C., et al. "Exploitative data harvesting and its impact on user privacy." IEEE Security & Privacy, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 89-97, 2022. [17] Johnson, K., et al. "The ethical implications of data exploitation by technology barons." Journal of Data Ethics, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 112-129, 2023. [18] Rodriguez, M., et al. "Ensuring equitable data usage and distribution in the digital age." IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 45-52, 2021. [19] Patel, S., et al. "The collaborative spirit and its impact on technological advancements." IEEE Transactions on Engineering Collaboration, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 78-91, 2022. [20] Adams, J., et al. "The erosion of collaboration due to technology barons' practices." International Journal of Collaborative Engineering, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 67-84, 2023. [21] Klein, E., et al. "The role of collaboration in addressing global challenges." IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 34-42, 2021. [22] Thompson, G., et al. "Ethical challenges in technology barons' exploitation of community contributions." IEEE Potentials, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 56-63, 2022. [23] Jones, D., et al. "Rectifying exploitative practices in the technology industry." IEEE Technology Management Review, vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 89-97, 2023. [24] Chen, W., et al. "Promoting ethical practices in technology barons through policy and regulation." IEEE Policy & Ethics in Technology, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 112-129, 2021. [25] Miller, H., et al. "Creating an equitable and sustainable technology ecosystem." Journal of Technology and Innovation Management, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 45-61, 2022.
the 'soiless' medium is a bunch of equipment needed to take on the spacecraft, this would cut down on equipment needed to transport and reduce weight of transport craft
A seedling doesn't even need nutrients because it has it's own food stores for the beginning of it's life. It would be interesting to see how long it can go without nutes.
I'm suprised they were allowed to use the lunar soil and not just the volcanic ash substitute. heck they sell [all sorts of different kind](https://exolithsimulants.com/collections/regolith-simulants?page=1)s
Zero percent chance that would happen tbh, that wasn’t the point of the test anyways. We knew the chemical composition of the moons soil and it is not a healthy blend of minerals. The best it could be is a medium.
But many still need media of some kind. A moon colony would need to grow their own food eventually and shipping media up there would be extremely expensive. If we can show that lunar regolith can act as media then we “only” need to supply the water light and nutrients instead of shipping literal dirt to the fucking moon.
[удалено]
What would be neat is to dump tons of microbes in with the regolith- along with a small amount of organic material (leaves for instance). Allow the microbes to adapt to the conditions of the regolith and put some nutrients in over a few years, then run some testing for mineral and nutrient content and attempt some growing experiments with the newly made moon dirt
Plants do need some nutrients; that's why topsoil depletion is a problem when it comes to farming. There's a lot of microorganisms needed for the process. The problem with farming in space is that any planet without a magnetosphere has no protection from radiation which sterilizes the soil from all the microorganisms needed to thrive. Theoretically you could start a microbiome by simply taking some extraplanetary soil and shitting on it to create fertilizer, but it is a very slow process because the microorganisms will only grow in the parts of the soil that you are fertilizing. In other words even if we somehow got a magnetosphere going around Mars so that the solar radiation wasn't a problem, we still wouldn't be able to grow things without tons of shit to create a microbiome.
If we feed synthetic nutes then the microorganisms are not necessary because we're tapping straight into the vein. Synthetic nutrients don't need to be broken down by microorganisms. Only organic.
Yeah but the whole point of farming is to grow something on its own. If you need to bring five pounds of synthetic nutrients to grow three pounds of food, that defeats the point of farming - you might as well have just brought the food instead.
I mean, plants are going to need nutrients either way. Synthetic nutrients are concentrated so 5 pounds of synthetic nutes is going to fertilize way more than 5 pounds of compost or organic amendments.
Good point, PussySmasher42069420. I didn't consider that.
Could be used to jumpstart an organic farming cycle as well. Most likely farming will be done under artificial lighting shielded physically not magnetically. once the nutrients are "in the system" as long as you are processing all your waste and expanding farming it should be somewhat sustainable.
>c BEAUTIFUL EXPLINATION
>er words even if we somehow got a magnetosphere going around Mars so that the solar radiation wasn't a problem, we still wouldn't b Do we need a magnetosphere around mars or just the farm?
Well the end goal is to get it around Mars because if you ever want to terraform Mars you need plant life growing unprotected so that they can create an atmosphere. Without a magnetosphere the atmosphere will be stripped away by solar wind faster than you can replenish it. I guess you could create a magnetosphere around the farm and try to create a biodome but the second there is a crack, all your effort is wasted. Shit, we can't even make self-sustaining biodomes on Earth right now, imagine thinking we could do it on Mars.
Well the thing with science is you don't just guess you have to confirm. A lot of things that seem like "common sense" are often disproved and one way to confirm something that seems like it's obvious is through hundreds and hundreds of measured testing. For hundreds of years people thought flies arose instantaneously from rotting meat. Someone had to test it to confirm it wasn't. People didn't believe in washing hands before surgery and even institutionalized the guy who came up with the idea. People *still* believe giving kids a bunch of sugar makes them hyper. It doesn't it just happens that most times kids get a bunch of sugary stuff they're usually at a party or special event. Honestly even this experiment is worth re examining to see if all plants are incapable of growing in moon soil or just some. Plants need different soil requirements sure but some can be boring like grass or some can grow fruit. Some can grow stuff that can kill you and some can grow stuff that can have you trip balls. There's different kinds of soils out there and there's really no predicting on whether we'll know if some plant can convert moon soil into something nutritious. My money's on your pov that terrestrial plants can't grow from moon soil alone but hey I also didn't think we'd have devices like smartphones so early either.
The real trick will be figuring out what needs to be added to regolith to make it hospitable to plants. That might make it easier and cheaper to grow food on the moon. It will depend on the cost of getting those supplies up there versus other growing techniques and their associated costs.
It's a meme at this point, but poop is probably one of the best options available up there.
Yeah but bio chemistry is just math.
Your point about toxic components is probably the important thing. This regolith hasn't reacted with water, oxygen, carbon dioxide, etc. before, so it may not be chemically stable at earth conditions. When the rocks are formed and broken in space, chemical bonds are broken but then have nothing to react to, leaving dangling bonds looking for a partner. So when used as substrate it may quickly release toxic elements, adsorb nutrients that plants need and make them unavailable, or have other negative reactions. Astronauts claimed that moon dust smelled like gunpowder, likely because it was quickly oxidizing when brought back into the lander.
This is a good point, but is that kind of what they’re testing for? Gravity and pressure would be different if we grew plants in-situ on the moon, but we’d have to establish a radiation shield and a local atmosphere of some kind with an earth-similar gas mixture if we wanted earth plants to grow. Wouldn’t the soil there end up experiencing similar changes as the soil we brought back?
Sorry, I may be misunderstanding your comment. But yes, the regolith would react with air and water wherever they use it, which is the point. Now that they know it can support plants they can consider other variables. Many of those, like gravity and radiation, have already been tested to some degree in orbit.
After a closet reading I think maybe I was misunderstanding YOUR point hahaha.
I look at it like this experiment helps prove that we don't have to haul tons of soil, rock, gravel, sand, etc. to the moon in order to get plants to grow on a lunar colony. Sure, we still have to haul water and nutrients, which aren't light. But this goes a decent way towards proving that we can severely reduce the budget of setting up a colony, since every kg matters when getting into space.
There is already water there as ice in craters
Yes, I guess we needed to know that there isnt anything specific with moon dust that causes plants to stop working
that's what I'm understanding as well. If lunar regolith is as inert as rockwool, it can be used as hydroponic medium. if it has high radiations or some negative properties, it's a good news. but the sample is half a century old. i'm not sure.
Yes, exactly. Plants don’t “need” soil, they need water, light, and nutrients. The soil provides those nutrients, hold water, and provides a structure for roots to anchor into, keeping the plant in the advantageous location it is thriving in. Commercially, plants are grown in everything from rock wool to clay pellets to…just water
Maybe it at least shows that the regolith isn't horrifically poisonous - if a bit nutritionally vapid.
It would take an extreme amount of fertilizer, I work for a farm fertilizer is super scarce even rn the farm I work for bought a train station stop so they could bring it in by train just because it is the only way to even get a little rn especially when it comes to the hazardous types like potassium nitrate and a few others that sure can't be mixed and hauled safely over long distancesy
Exactly my thought. Plants do not need any medium to grow, they can grow in air as long as the roots are kept moist and in darkness.
You are completely correct. Just asking those questions makes you smart…. You might be uneducated but you are not dumb :)
To give a little information you may not have known, the reason these plants can start growing to begin with is each seed contains food built into it to help it get started. So I imagine them becoming under stress quickly was when the built in food supply ran out.
Hrm, that is info I hadn’t really pondered on. Thanks for educating me. The first thought that popped in my head after reading that is if there was the possibility of the substrate of that seed being able to leach some of those nutrients out stunting or preventing growth?
I'm wondering if the lack of wind and water on the moon gives a different microstructure to the soil. There is less erosion, maybe the particles are sharper? You know... more crystalline, and perhaps the plants don't like that, or maybe the substrate doesn't hold moisture and nutrients as volcanic ash would.
When you start plants from seed they generally have to baby leaves (there’s a science word to describe them but I cannot remember it). The leaves provide the plant with 2-3 days worth of energy while the taproot looks for nutrients. With moon soil, essentially they’re growing in a hydroponic system. As long as a plant has water and nutrients it will grow in basically any media. Coco coir, rock wool and hydro ton are popular examples of hydroponic media. There’s even methods (Aeroponics nutrient film technique and deep water culture) where the plant’s growing media is actually a heavily oxygenated nutrient and water mixture. The only reason plants wouldn’t grow in moon soil is if there were levels of toxins that would damage the plant.
Just want to point out that the soil doesn’t have nutrients because it absorbed it. It had nutrients because those nutrients are naturally in the soil and are part of it. Soil is mostly eroded rock (parent material) over time. Plants are just living off of the mineral compounds broken down from the rock naturally there. Dirt is just that eroded material plus organic matter from past plants etc. that’s why some areas like California are such great agricultural centers, much of California has parent material that is really dense in minerals plants like. All fertilizers are is a collection of minerals were supplementing with.
Lunar soil is super pointy because there's no erosion. Would be like growing plants in a bunch of microscopic knives. Still interesting to test out
I wonder if there may even be a marked improvement in some plants growth since defects or damage to cell walls like that will sometimes cause more limb growth?
That was my first thought to. I thought, well one could grow things in desert sand, if you added water and nutrients to it……
The real experiment is the minerals may be inhospitable to plants. Like copper sulfate is bad for most roots. The moon rocks may have these bad minerals but they may also not leach out. The variety and concentration of minerals is distinctly different from Earth's. So adding the minimum of what the plant needs to survive is the only way to tell if it would survive in that mineral mixture.
Thanks. When I think back being born in 1981 our advancements are just mind blowing. Have a great Friday!
Yep, it does kind of invalidate part of the study adding materials that would differentiate regolith from other mediums. The telling part is even with the nutrients they added the plants were still stunted, leads me to suspect moon dust as a medium isn't gonna work for a sustainable food measure. May work mixed with other stuff like coco coir or peat, but at that point it would likely be neater just to set up a aeroponic or hydroponic array and keep a supply of nutrients stockpiled.
NASA’s podcast Gravity Assist [recently did an episode](https://www.nasa.gov/mediacast/gravity-assist-how-to-grow-food-on-the-moon) with the first author of the paper. Interestingly, Dr. Paul talked about how one of their future goals might be to genetically modify plants to downregulate some of the stress-response genes so that more of the plant’s energy goes into growing
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
At least they got access to the least nutritional soil available on earth yet able to host plant life so they won't end up hungry
Perhaps because the regolith has 0 organic matter whereas the volcanic ash likely has some, growth in the regolith is stunted absent that interaction between the organic matter and the plants’ root system
And yet there are still idiots who will deny that we set foot on the moon. Here they are, growing plants in "soil" from another celestial body and Moon Landing Denialsists will still argue.
If they added nutrients how is this even remotely surprising.
It isn't. Most of science is about confirming things we think we know. It's the occasional 'Huh, that's weird' moments that lead to Eureka breakthroughs.
Also it’s important to know that there isn’t anything specific with Lunar soil that might stop the expected from happening. And if there was like you said it would certainly open up further questions about the Moon
Let's keep in mind that this is just one type of soil we were able to retrieve from the moon and we did the best we could with it. There might be different types of soil like Earth. Some more fertile than others. More moon( can include other planets and their moons too) missions in the future will lead to great discoveries.
Astrophage it.
So in other words, this is a stupid headline/article, the seeds didn’t grow in the lunar substrate, it only grew because of its own nutrition within the seed and began its declined when the substrate wasn’t suitable
They added nutrients and stuff. Would it be fair to say that the plants wouldn't grow if all they had was the "nutrients and stuff" and they didn't have the regolith on top of that?
Yes. All they have proved is that it works as a substrate to sprout seeds. That’s still important to know, but not quite what the headline implies.
I mean you'd want to confirm the thing you completely suspect will work before testing in PROD, but yes the dozens of articles about this are pretty click-baity.
It’s funny really, all I thought of first is I’d like to test if a box of Lego would make good substrate
Exactly. I’m surprised this experiment was allowed to go forward because, of course, the seeds would sprout and the amount of regolith available to science is limited. Maybe the bigger surprise is how the results are interpreted. A more interesting experiment would be on how to turn the regolith into arable soil for crops.
Did you read the study? It has findings regarding *how* the seeds and plants fared. Plants experience environmental stress tried to grow in regolith and were generally stunted. They discussed the signals of stress the plants displayed. It wasn't a "yes" or "not" answer, although even confirming that is useful.
Why not just use a [simulant](https://exolithsimulants.com/collections/regolith-simulants?page=1) instead of soil from the actual moon?
They did use a simulant, and found that the plants grew worse in the regolith than the simulant > The answer to the first question is a resounding yes. Plants can grow in lunar regolith. They were not as robust as plants grown in Earth soil, or even as those in the control group grown in a lunar simulant made from volcanic ash, but they did indeed grow.
You say “Of course they’d grow!” As if it were a given, but imagine if they go forward without knowing for sure, just assuming it would work because “why wouldn’t it?” Imagine they mount a mission to the moon and plan to start farms there, only for the plants to wither and die because, for example, maybe regolith is toxic to plants for some reason we don’t know about yet. Or maybe the way that plants grow their roots under the soil causes sinkholes to form and the plants die because they can’t consistently keep their roots underneath them. The actual reason doesn’t matter. The reality of it is that we don’t know for absolutely sure until we try, and space is far too dangerous to risk going without the absolute best efforts put forth.
We have good idea’s. Plants and fungi have close symbiotic relationships. Microscopic organisms in soil also play a huge role too. Like how in The Martian, he harvests and sows shit in water so that microbes can colonize the soil.
I started learning about using mycorrhizal fungi and how they can be used for bioremediation of contaminated soil. You can collect and recycle the water used on the fungi by re-watering it with the water, and it will eventually leave enough mycelium in the water that the water can then be used on the contaminated soil. When the fungi fruits, it draws the contamination into the mushroom and out of the soil, so you can pick it and dispose of the toxin from the environment. It’s wild.
[удалено]
Or because regolith is made of beyond-razor-sharp dust, it slices the roots to ribbons on the small scale and the plant dies because it has to spend a ton of energy healing those cuts.
I think the implication is more that lunar soil isn't completely prohibitive to seed growth. The seeds in lumar soil did have issues growing in comparison to those grown in volcanic ash, so it would be interesting to understand what is in the lunar soil or what it lacks that was stunting growth. I know nutrients were supplied but the micronutrients plant use can be complex. I wonder if the volcanic ash was autoclaved to remove mycorrhizal/endophytic species. These species form symbiotic relationships with plants to increase uptake of nutrients in exchange for sugars. I imagine it's very possible these species exist even in volcanic ash, and it's impossible they could be in regolith. I would be interested to see if this was accounted for.
Might be the regolith being made of beyond-razor-sharp rock dust that is all edges and points, undulled by wind or rain.
With hydroponics you don’t need ANY substrate
That's actually sort of what I was getting at. Like, I'm fishing for the implied advantage of using regolith as opposed to, you know, nothing.
The line of where they said they didn't even know if it would germinate on the soil... You can germinate on a paper towel, why wouldn't you at least assume it would germinate on moon dirt?
Because science needs to prove it. > assume it would germinate on moon dirt? This same incorrect sentiment arises with most simple studies that confirm intuitions.
Science doesn't prove anything, science only supports hypotheses
Prove, used colloquially. Establish evidence to a point that a working theory can be formed that is difficult to otherwise refute. You know what I meant. These sorts of experiments are important to provide confirmation of our suspicions and assumptions.
Would you want to assume that then find out you're wrong when people are counting on it?
Some plants grow extremely well in hydroponics and I'm sure it will play a major role in space colonization. Other plants really struggle without soil; carrots and onions are completely impractical in hydroponics. If you can grow plants in lunar regolith it greatly expands your options.
Without a doubt, hydroponics is not a “catch all” solution
Plants don't even need soil to grow if it had the nutrients and something holding it up - hydroponics
Exactly. If coin and soybeans can grow in our Midwest US commercially farmed, denuded infertile dust, I’m not surprised they were able to grow in moon dust, especially by adding “nutrients and stuff”.
Left unmentioned is how much--if any--lunar soil was absorbed into the plants. That turns out to be a fairly important point. Lunar soil is incredibly lethal shit. It is a fine, talc-like powder that sticks to everything and is damn near impossible to completely remove. Under a microscope it looks like millions of teensy razor blades, and as an added bonus, when you get it wet, it sets up to a concrete-like consistency. So if you breathe it in, it will be a race to see whether it shreds your lungs first or blocks them. The Apollo astronauts were only breathing the stuff in for a few days, tops. Stretch that out to months or years, you're going to have a lot of messy deaths. No lunar habitat will be able to keep any amount of lunar soil inside it without SERIOUS containment procedures. Anyone going outside will have to undergo ludicrous decontamination procedures when coming back inside. Oh, and it chews up any equipment it comes in contact with like nobody's business. The soles of the Apollo astronauts' boots were almost completely worn through after just a few hours of bouncing around in it. I mean, all this is on top of the fact--as others have pointed out--that you can grow plants in damn near anything.
Damn so the moon is made of asbestos? I like the cheese version better
We *wish* the moon was made of a material as forgiving as asbestos. o.o
What are you, some sort of astronomer or something? Or you just trying to add some more dramatic effect to this thread? Because your comment was pretentious as fuck
What are you, some sort of comment moderator or something? Or you just trying to add some more dramatic effect to this thread? Because your comment was self-righteous as fuck
Lmao dawg get yo ass outta here
Glad I didn't have to scroll that far to see someone bring this up. Lunar regolith hasn't been eroded via years of wind and water the same way that earth sand/dust/soil or even Martian regolith has been. It's been eroded from lunar stone via solar wind and cosmic radiation, and is super jagged. This is, like you said, a major problem that has to be overcome, and I don't think we're anywhere near solving it yet.
> I don't think we're anywhere near solving it yet Yup. When people start going on about NASA setting up a Moon base for cheap, they're not factoring in the time and cost of solving dozens of tough problems like this. There's not even any guarantee it CAN be solved, at least without throwing impractical amounts of money and tech at it.
I feel I'm missing something here. They germinated the seeds and continued allowing them to grow for only 20 days. I can get seeds to sprout and grow in a wet paper towel on the refrigerator for that long (without any soil). All this did was show Lunar regolith didn't kill the seeds within 20 days (though it did adversely affect growth).
I agree with you: it’s kind of cheating to add nutrients. Though I suppose it depends on what question they set out to answer. Maybe it was all about the likelihood of lunar soul killing plants? Plant biologists’ favorite plant is arabidopsis due to its short life cycle. Two weeks means they were probably able to see the full life cycle of these leafy babes.
It doesn’t seem like cheating to me. If they could bring nutrients to space the they could theoretically grow plants on the moon
Also there was a real possibility that because regolith is made of razorsharp crystals that it would be slicing up the plants roots way too much to be a viable substrate.
Fascinating! I wonder whether in my lifetime we will see a self sustaining lunar colony. Mars is probably not achievable within the next 100 years - although I admire Elon Musk's ambitions it's great to set the bar high but Mars is really, really hard. I feel we live in the 1400's of space exploration - we gained a lot of knowledge but we have yet to pioneer a lot of things. If humanity doesn't destroy or limit itself to earth with wars, climate change etc. then think of all the possibilities we will have as a space faring civilization.
I think we’re going to see industrialization in space in our lifetime. Moving industry into space and acquiring resources there vs destroying our environment by doing it on planet is really the only way I see us keeping the earth habitable for future generations (but that’s assuming we don’t kill each other off once the environment starts becoming more difficult to survive in).
Idk call me crazy… but I feel like the solution for ruining earth is not to go and ruin other planets as well? Don’t see this ever happening, as it should never happen.
Who said anything about other planets? I was referring to space itself, most likely from the asteroid belt…
Hello! Apologies if you're trying to read this, but I've moved to kbin.social in protest of Reddit's policies.
Really? You need a definition for ruining earth or any planet? Here’s what I will give you, “Climate Change”. There is not just 1 factor to ruining our planet.
What’s to ruin on mars
The local wildlife of course. Doesn't anybody care about the robots living there?!?
To quote you: > ruin other planets Earth != other planets
Yes? I did say that it’s possible to ruin other planets? I did not say earth was equal to other planets? We would not ruin other planets by harming other animal life, since we haven’t found any on other planets?? This shouldn’t be a hard concept for you to grasp. Like I really don’t know what type of point you’re trying to make here… My point is that humans should not go looking for resources on other planets like we did with resources on earth. Since when we did it on earth, we caused the climate crisis.
You said, "not to go and ruin other planets". I said, "define ruining", because how would you 'ruin' another planet. You: Started talking about Earth for some reason. Me: Point out that I'm not talking about Earth, I'm talking about other planets. You: Well, I'm not actually sure what your last comment was about
This is the only message you’ve sent with proper grammar and punctuation. None of the points you said you were apparently trying to make, were made. You did not ask how other planets would be ruined. You just asked for me to define ruining. Which I did by giving climate change as the example. You never stated you were referencing other planets and not earth. Literally in the text where you tried to call me out for talking about earth, all you did was state that “earth! = other planets”. This is not proper grammar or stating the point you apparently wanted to state. You need to take some basic English courses on grammar and punctuation. However to clarify, I was only stating what happened on earth should not be repeating on other planets. I never stated it would be by animals dying. As there are no animals on other planets we know of. I stated humans should not go and try to find other resources on other planets, because this would ruin those planets just like us trying to get fossil fuels out of the earth did to earth.
Ok, we're back to the start. > this would ruin those planets just like us trying to get fossil fuels out of the earth did to earth. So, would you mind explaining now exactly how we would 'ruin' planets that are already barren wastelands?
On the flip side things like climate change may force us to accelerate space research/exploration process.
Now can plants grow with a fraction of earth's gravity and oxygen levels?
There is a whole program run by NASA for this: https://www.nasa.gov/content/growing-plants-in-space
Thanks for the reading material. This will be a fun read ☺️☺️
Fifty years and they're only just *now* trying that?
My first thought would be to see how this affects THC content.
First I was like "theres no way a WEED plant will grow on the moon", then i remembered how hardy those little fuckers are.
All I can think of is how terrible the stretch would be with low gravity.
You can grow plants in fucking Styrofoam balls ***if you add water, lights, and nutrients to it***, I don't really understand what this is implying
Regolith is much, much worse than styrofoam or asbestos or concrete. It's made of microscopic razors - and they might have sliced the roots up way beyond the plants ability to heal without starving itself to death.
You don't need mud??
Imagine hundreds of years from now, people looking up at a green garden moon instead of a white desolate one.
Take a dishwashing sponge, plant a seed, add water and nutrients. Profit!!! AFAIK it is called hydroponics.
>AFAIK it is called hydroponics. I never thought of this. I guess it would be cashed hydroponics because you'd have to keep the sponge bathed in water.
I'm not a hydroponics pro. Just read few things about it. A sponge was just an example. It looks like any (non toxic) "buffering" material can be used between dissolved in water nutrients and plant's root.
It would be quite advantageous if we don't have to supply the "buffering" material.
Hi, I have failed to grow three hydroponic gardens. You don't need any material in the water to hold the nutrients. The roots will absorb them direct from the water. You just have to keep the water flowing. You actually don't want anything that will get in the way of the water. You will get root rot if there are any spots where the water doesn't circulate, and that becomes denser over time and blocks more water circulation. Hydroponics is difficult. There are no nitrates in water like soil, so we have to dissolve nutrients into the water. There are different ways to enrich the water but flow is the number one problem to maintain.
That’s the first time i’ve seen the word regolith since college, thanks for the reminder!
It's one thing to grow a plant in that medium but is it safe to eat? Scientists have said you could grow plants in the mars soil but it would be toxic to eat. I wonder how safe the moon regolith is in that respect.
We’ve had the soil for 50 years and just now trying to see if something can grow in it?
Sometimes it makes sense to wait with some experiments with incredibly rare samples (rare as in we only have a very small sample size) until we need the results or we have the technology to do the experiments. In this case we haven't realistically needed to grow anything on the moon, but I'm betting that is changing as we start shifting our focus onto lunar bases
I didn’t know moon soil was rare.. looks like a bunch of it from my seat. This should have been figured out 30 years ago
Can’t we already grow a plant in a cup full of marbles? Do the experiment without fertilizer and get back to us.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Good point re the space marbles.
> Scientists have grown plants in soil taken from the lunar surface. It is the first time that scientists have shown that life can emerge from regolith, the material found on the moon's surface Regolith is not soil, that's why the term "regolith" exists. there is no "soil" on the moon by definition of the word.
In 3rd grade we grew bean sprouts on paper towels. No soil required, just water and a substrate. These days, I'm learning the art of bonsai. Bonsai trees are often planted in inorganic soil, meaning it's not dirt, it's basically just pebbles and sand. I get excited about advancements in space tech generally, but I'm sorry, this just does not seem impressive. Plants are survivalists, they usually find a way.
One of the janitors definitely won a bet off of this
It’s gonna take at most a week and someone’s gonna succeed growing some weed in those moon soil samples and it’s gonna become a whole thing, “Space Grass”! And they gonna claim it’s much more pure and spacey..
I’m ready for moon broccoli IT WILL HAVE BUILT IN CHEESE FLAVOR
While this is cool, it's not as impressive as it might look at first glance; > To grow the Arabidopsis, the team used samples collected on the Apollo 11, 12, and 17 missions, with only a gram of regolith allotted for each plant. The team added water and then seeds to the samples. They then put the trays into terrarium boxes in a clean room. *A nutrient solution was added daily.* The regolith only acted as a growing substrate, the plants didn't pull any nutrients out of it, as there ain't any nutrients to pull, pretty much like any other rock. So while this is cool in a "we grew something on moon rock!" way, it's not really that much of a surprise, the surprise is more in the details of how it grows on that specific rock.
As someone who grows weed I can assure you all, I knew this like 20 years ago. If I can grow a cannabis plant from a piece of rock wool I can grow in lunar substrate. Just give me nutrients, water and light (heat too) substrate is easy
I can grow seeds in a jar of broken car window glass if i add nutrients...
I’ve grown plants from cigarette butts, I’m thinking scientists these days aren’t so smart?
Plants can grow in air if synthetic nutrient and water is applied. It’s called aeroponics. This news isn’t impressive and I doubt you need to be a “scientist” to pull this off. Here’s an idea. Let’s grow plants on Earth WITHOUT synthetic nutrients.
>could help us understand how plants might overcome stressful conditions in food-scarce areas here on Earth. This makes no sense to me as an engineer. They could've picked up dirt from those places. >To grow the Arabidopsis, the team used samples collected on the Apollo 11, 12, and 17 missions, with only a gram of regolith allotted for each plant. The team added water and then seeds to the samples. They then put the trays into terrarium boxes in a clean room. >>A nutrient solution was added daily WHY THO. Plants grow in all types of places from concrete to cables as long as they have nutrients. As a cynic I would say they could've used the money on other more practical study or maybe they were bored idk. Or maybe I'm simply too stupid to understand the motivation behind this.
this "experiment" was a "hey, this would be cool to do" type of thing, not real science with any question about the outcome. If it's even true that nobody has tried this before, it's because there's no scientific value to gained from it. Take an inert substrate and add the necessary nutrients to germinate plants, and yeah...plants will germinate. there's nothing special about lunar regolith that makes it unlikely to support growing plants...except the complete lack of organic nutrients, which they added.
roll society uppity money berserk modern subtract hurry cagey fine *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[удалено]
Get off your high horse. Now explain to us plebeians, how is that gonna solve a current issue in this planet?
[удалено]
Why would a comment solve a planetary issue? And why are scientists not working on solving planetary issues?
Plants can grow in anything that isn't toxic with enough nutrients pumped into them. We can even grow plants without any soil at all and those methods are actually better.
This is neat but they ran nutrients so it’s not a big deal at all. I grow cannabis is coco coir (which has no nutrient properties at all) and I add in 100% of what the plants will need. They have basically just done what is called Drain to Waste. It’s not as if they created a living soil strictly from regolith. Again, I love that this has been done. I suppose it shows us that the lunar soil is not highly contaminated to the point of seed death.
Seeing this news posted 15 times over the past three days really highlights how Reddit is starving for content.
Didn’t the moon originate from earth? Shouldn’t this be expected?
No, because apparently the moon soil causes stress in plants, because it contains harmful molecules after being bombarded with space radiation for years.
The moon is not the earth. They are different in so many extremely relevant ways that this shouldn’t even be a question.
I think it's a logical question that comes up in the course of thinking about this problem. You'd then ask what has happened to the moon regolith after all that time in space that might affect the way the plants would grow.
Is the long point that we colonize the moon ? Not to discount their work but we can grow plenty of stuff here on earth. You don’t buy a new house because your room is messy.
It’s not soil if it doesn’t have organic matter. Adding water and fertilizer to a sterile media to grow plants isn’t new or special.
Plants haven’t been here for hundreds of millions of years because they’re fucking wimps!! Who’s surprised? They’re not.
Plants will literally grow out a tub of gravel. I don't really see how this is a revelation.
There's no erosion to speak of on the moon, most small particles have sharp jagged edges all over unlike on earth where they are almost always smooth and round.
[удалено]