(I know this is about Rifftrax, but we don’t have a Rifftrax community.)

  • @groats_survivor
    link
    1
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Is this even true? Why would they keep breeding something inedible and practically useless hoping in thousands of years it’d be edible?

    I really don’t know, it just seems like a stretch

    Edit: spelling

    • Flying SquidOP
      link
      269 months ago

      It is true. They can trace the genetic lineage. The original plant isn’t totally inedible, it’s just less nutritious and harder to process. The same is true with wild grains in the Middle East. precursors of domesticated crops like wheat and barley were cultivated from wild grasses which produced less, had less nutrition and took more effort to process into flour.

      • @ForgotAboutDreB
        link
        209 months ago

        It’s wrong to say they were useless like OP suggests. They were very useful. It was a crop you could reliably grow and come back to harvest.

        It also stored very well. The breeding was only to make it more useful. It was always useful.

        Much of the breeding was just selection. The crops you would pick and store would be larger. So we it came to plant your were using the biggest largest variety every year. A few generations of this would produce notable results. Then even finer and more deliberate selection would be done.

        • Flying SquidOP
          link
          99 months ago

          I didn’t make the picture. I just felt that it was finally time to answer the question: Is corn a grass?

          It has puzzled Bill Corbetts the world over.