Talk:Edible protein per unit area of land

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I don't mean to be silly but: what is the production rate of these grams of protein? Can I harvest that much every day, month or year? Without that little piece of information, the rest does not help.

That's exactly what I was going to say.

This page reaks of being a POV Fork.--Shahar Goldin 18:29, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to address these concerns by removing the POV (and took down the POV tag), but in doing so I haven't been able to find the term used anywhere other than Wikipedia, and possibly the one book cited. It seems that this measure isn't used by anyone except that one book, which was probably using it to push a POV. I proposed deletion because of this. If someone thinks it really is a legitimate, notable measure please remove the prod tag and add some citations and places where it is used.--Bibliophylax 18:16, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Does it bother anyone that the only source on this page is over 25 years old? The source itself can be bought on a very large on-line bookseller for as little as $0.28 (today, 3-15-08). This chart means absolutely nothing to me and I would not trust it for anything relating to the 21st century. I would just as soon delete this stub! PurdueAG 05 18:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PurdueAG 05 (talk • contribs)

Edible protein per unit area of land wouldn't really be a useful measurement, because it doesn't take into consideration that different crops are represented differently in different conditions (climates and soils). 138 pounds per acre for wheat for example. An acre where? On a central Saskatchewan wheat farm, or on a central China wheat farm? Obviously those two places are going to have different yields. And I think it would be impossible to correct for such differences in representation by different crops (and pasturelands), because different crops fare differently in the same conditions. --70.54.5.241 (talk) 22:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Contents 1 POV? 2 References 3 Calculations 4 Fish farming 5 Revisions 6 Foodstuff? 7 'limiting amino acid? 8 Order? 9 Completeness

[edit] POV?

And what POV is the article expressing? Its mostly a chart of numbers. Its mathematics. I would say if one number was in bold or it was sorted in some unusual fashion to put one number ahead of another unfairly, then it would be point of view. If you have credible sources to show another number is more correct add it and list the source. If you think it should have another column showing lysine per acre, please add it. All numbers are grams per calendar year, as per the USDA. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 18:36, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

• Wheat protein as a percent of crop yield

[edit] Calculations

• Crude protein yield [is] calculated by multiplying the grain yield by grain crude protein concentration (GCPC). [1]

[edit] Fish farming

"Although not shown on the chart, Fish farming with integrated recycling systems is currently the most efficient form of agriculture by this measure." What is the source of the fats, carbohydrates, and proteins to feed the fish? And where would the combination fall on the chart?--Unsigned comment by User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )

The Fish farming article has that fact. I haven't been able to find ANY source ANYWHERE that lists how this measure is calculated for any foodstuff. I don't know the source of the fertilizers and other things that grow soy or wheat or anything. This is an encyclopedia, not a dissertation--it isn't necessary to have methodology discussed. What is the purpose of removing this? Do you just really want to glorify soy?--Bibliophylax 15:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I've readded this fact, along with a number of citations to support it. I hope this satisfies your concerns. If you're curious about the source of food to feed the fish, one of the links explains how the fish farms using the integrated reclcying system uses algae in the tank to feed the fish, and recycles the fish waste to fertilize other plants... meaning that there are no additional acres needed to support the fish farming. I didn't include this in the article because it isn't directly relevant to the topic, but if you need to establish is for yourself it is in the links.--Bibliophylax 15:48, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, no problem, I just moved it here till I found a number myself. All the numbers are hard to find online. I was lucky to find them in a book, but I want to find references for each online. The problem is that most numbers are given as a percent of total weight in the Wikipedia articles, and at various agricultural websites, which requires you to do some math. For fish farming cycle do you use the human waste to fertilize the plants to, so its a closed loop?

[edit] Revisions

I have added the usable protein values in relation to the Biological Values of each foodstuff hoping to add relevence to the existing table. I have also reformated the article to improve it's overall appearence.

Good move, but it would be nice to use PDCAAS instead of BV as there are concerns about the usefulness of BV - see Biological Value. Even then I'm not sure if either measure takes account of digestive absorption of the food vs. losses during digestion. BV apparently does not, I'm not sure if PDCAAS corrects this. Spike 09:40, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Foodstuff?

Foodstuff? I must wikify that word.

[edit] 'limiting amino acid?

What does this mean?

IceDragon64 (talk) 00:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

It means that biological absorption of proteins is limited by having a complete set of essential amino acids. If one or more essential amino acids are not present in the foodstuff - or available elsewhere in the diet - then full use of all the ingested amino acids in protein synthesis is blocked or challenged, and so the incorporation of the dietary protein into body tissue protein is reduced. In some cases the body will use alternate protein synthesis pathways that conserve the essential amino acids, but this will be less efficient.

See here: Properties of the protein source and PDCAAS

Spike 09:37, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Order?

what order is this chart in? I would have put it in descending order by grams/M2, which it sort of already is

IceDragon64 (talk) 00:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Completeness

It definately could do with a few more figures in there. When you guys have decided on a figure for farmed fish, do put it in there. Are there any comparible figures for nut production eg Peanuts or fungal production?

IceDragon64 (talk) 00:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Canola (rape seed) should be given as it is a major crop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.36.150.69 (talk) 02:06, 27 February 2008 (UTC)