Welcome, Guest

Author Topic: Feeding GMO sugar  (Read 1668 times)

Offline Duane

  • House Bee
  • **
  • Posts: 289
  • Gender: Male
Feeding GMO sugar
« on: October 01, 2017, 02:09:53 pm »
I remember reading a few months ago in Bee Culture about GMO sugar.  It said that genetically modifying the  plants affect the DNA and proteins but not the carbohydrates.  The refinement process should leave pure sucrose.  Sucrose is sucrose.  Any other thoughts on this?

Van, Arkansas, USA

  • Guest
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2017, 02:43:04 pm »
Yes Sir, Duane.  You have written 3 sentences with questions that a proper response could entail a book in length.  First : GMO means "genetically modified organism."

Let me break this down for you.  "Sucrose is sucrose" absolutely correct.  GMO alters proteins not carbohydrates?? In this case Bee Culture was referring to a specific GMO plant???  Is that right?

If yes, In that specific case indeed only the proteins may be altered.  However do not make the mistake and believe all GMO alterations (mutations) only affect proteins.  A GMO can be directed to alter: fats, proteins, sugars, even to induce toxins to be more specific, the sky is the limit within reason.
Blessings

Offline Duane

  • House Bee
  • **
  • Posts: 289
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2017, 03:10:41 pm »
I believe this was in regard to sugar beets.  So yes, I guess it would be correct that it is possible to have a GMO plant that changes the sucrose molecule.  However, it wouldn't be sucrose then, and probably would have characteristics that people who bake with it would not like.  So, making an assumption, they would ensure the sucrose had not been changed, or there'd be complaints both about the cooking characteristics and about it not being sucrose.  I think that could be a reasonable assumption.  I read [on the Internet!] that labs have tested the sucrose and found it the same whether GMO, conventional, or organic.

I believe the point of modifying the sugar beets were to give them insect resistance.  I read elsewhere they are modified for herbicide resistance.

The base question I have is, I early on mistakenly bought plain "sugar" for feeding my bees.  Then I heard that I should only use cane sugar as it's not modified.  (Now I hear cane sugar is starting to be modified).  I have "free" sugar that is useless to me otherwise.  Also, I see in the store larger bags of sugar for cheaper prices that don't say GMO free.  While one side of me says don't take the risk, another side says that sucrose is sucrose if it's been refined so no protein is in it and there's no risk.

Van, Arkansas, USA

  • Guest
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2017, 03:55:42 pm »
I have used cane sugar to make bee syrup and notice the product is clear, colorless.  When I use sugar that does not state the word " Cane" and make bee syrup the product has a slight darkness to the syrup.  So I am guessing there are impurities to the non cane sugar.  Now the question is what makes the non cane sugar a darker color, like very weak tea, what are the impurities?  If molasses, then I don't have a problem with that.  I don't know what makes the non cane sugar, or sugar beet sugar darker.

My bees and I both eat the sugar that's on sale.  Not recommending, just stating a fact.  Scrunity is a virtue.
Blessings

Offline little john

  • Super Bee
  • *****
  • Posts: 1537
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #4 on: October 01, 2017, 07:31:30 pm »
For all intents and purposes, sucrose is indeed sucrose - but - if you're an analytical chemist then there certainly IS a difference between Beet Sugar (which is C3) and Cane Sugar (C4).  Presumably this difference is maintained despite any genetic modification of the plants concerned - but you'd need to check this.

The difference between C3 and C4 sugars is due to plant biochemistry. It's a hugely technical subject, but you can get a taste of it (pun intentional) from page 5 of:
https://ec.europa.eu/food/sites/food/files/safety/docs/oc_control-progs_honey_jrc-tech-report_2016.pdf

From a beekeeping point of view, adulteration of honey with as little as 1% of C4 (cane) sugar can be detected, in contrast to the detection sensitivity of C3 (beet) sugar currently being 10%.

From the above report - 14% of the samples taken in 2015 were considered to be 'non-compliant' (i.e. suspected as having been adulterated).  Which is a problem.
LJ
A Heretics Guide to Beekeeping - http://heretics-guide.atwebpages.com

Offline Duane

  • House Bee
  • **
  • Posts: 289
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #5 on: October 01, 2017, 10:36:05 pm »
I'll have to read that in more detail.  I didn't feed my bees much and didn't get any honey this year and needing to feed this fall.  I hear other people feeding lots and seemed late to me.  I've wondered if there's a way of preventing the bees from moving the sugar water around.  Maybe not 14% of the time....!  I've also been wondering if people feed the brood nest full of sugar water, then let the bees bring the nectar in for the supers.  That to me doesn't seem like really harvesting "extra" honey from the bees, but more like substituting.

Van, Arkansas, USA

  • Guest
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #6 on: October 01, 2017, 11:01:18 pm »
Sir Lil John, hey buddy.  C3 is nectar synthesis, whereas C4 is sugar synthesis. Do you agree with this?
Blessings

Offline Duane

  • House Bee
  • **
  • Posts: 289
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2017, 10:59:35 am »
After reading page 5 and 6, I understand they are detecting honey adulteration by comparing Carbon-13 to Carbon-12 isotopic ratios.  Sugar is still sugar, but different isotopic (radiation) levels.  C3 and C4 has nothing to do with nectar versus sugar but has to do with the type of plant, sugar beet being C3 and sugar cane being C4.  So sucrose is sucrose, but with a different type of carbon atom.  Not that that would make much difference.  But I suppose it could, because it appears the plants are somehow selecting against C13 to a degree.

Quite the ingenious design of detecting honey adulteration.  Complete reading of the article would be needed to specifically understand, but it sounds like pure honey has a different isotopic ratio than added sugar.  But one would presume it could be possible to adulterate honey with the correct refined sugars to simulate the ratio.  However, honey contains protein.

Offline flyingron

  • New Bee
  • *
  • Posts: 4
  • Gender: Male
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2017, 11:25:26 am »
There's really not a lot of difference between sucrose from C3 and C4 plants.   Yes one has a slightly different preference for the carbon isotopes, but there's no indication that the honey production or any of the human digestive pathways care about any of this.

It is not the case that C4 plants can't produce nectar that bees will make honey from.    It is just the case that most of the common nectar producting plants are C3.   However, bees will make honey just fine from C4 plants if that is what is available to them.

Offline little john

  • Super Bee
  • *****
  • Posts: 1537
Re: Feeding GMO sugar
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2017, 11:52:11 am »
Sir Lil John, hey buddy.  C3 is nectar synthesis, whereas C4 is sugar synthesis. Do you agree with this?
Blessings

Hi Van - as some 90% of plants are thought to employ C3 synthesis, I'd say you're almost certainly correct in concluding that the sugar component of nectar is indeed C3.

A short quote pulled from that report:
Quote
"The nectar and honeydew, respectively, are transformed into honey by the bee enzymes diastase (amylases) and invertase (a-glucosidase) during storage and maturation in the beehive. During this process, diastase and invertase catalyse the conversion of the sugars of nectar and honeydew into fructose and glucose, the main constituents of honey. The result is a complex mixture made up of about  70% monosaccharides and 10-15% disaccharides composed of glucose and fructose with the glycosidic bond in different positions and configurations."

This, as I see it, is the crux of the matter - it's not simply a case of C3 or C4 - but one of honey vs extracted and refined sugars, for as the above quote reveals, the sugar component of honey is itself extremely complex, and that - along with the local minerals pulled up from the soil to become constituents of nectar - renders honey from each locality completely individual.  Contrast that uniqueness with the more-or-less uniform content of extracted and refined beet or cane sugars, within which even their impurities will tend to be uniform.


"whereas C4 is sugar synthesis".  But can't agree with that conclusion, for although sugar 'stored' within sugar-cane is C4, sugar similarly 'stored' within sugar-beet is most certainly C3.

Notably, there's a group of plants which grow in essentially arid regions, but which experience sudden downpours - such as pineapple, cacti and agave - which employ both C3 and C4 synthesis, presumably to cater for such sudden events ... I guess.  Wish I'd studied this area of biology in depth, as I'm finding such adaptations really interesting.
'best,
LJ

PS - as long as no-one is planning to adulterate their honey - none of this stuff really matters very much.
A Heretics Guide to Beekeeping - http://heretics-guide.atwebpages.com