Jump to content

Talk:Rapeseed

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.167.45.203 (talk) at 05:40, 27 June 2009 (→‎Article needs to explain where it got its name). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconAgriculture B‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconHong Kong Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Hong Kong, a project to coordinate efforts in improving all Hong Kong-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Hong Kong-related articles, you are invited to join this project.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Hong Kong To-do:

Attention needed (60)

Collaboration needed

Improvement needed

Cleanup needed

Image needed (347)

Destub needed

Deorphan needed

Page creation needed

Miscellaneous tasks

WikiProject iconPlants Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconFood and drink Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Food and Drink task list:
To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:
Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Extracting and refining rapeseed oil external link is dead —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.125.157.149 (talk) 09:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I've heard that rapeseed oil is very dangerous to humans when consumed. This article says it is not dangerous. What's the whole story?

Original varieties contained a substance which was toxic. Mostly used for lamps and consumed by poor people, or during WWI. Then varieties without were isolated (in Canada I think), multiplied... and current cultivated ones are not toxic any more. SweetLittleFluffyThing

See my comment about Canola below. Glucosinolates were the problem.Tomcrisp7 12:06, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Emergency landings

Rapeseed fields are considered ideal when attempting to make a light aircraft emergency landings (practice forced landings). This is because the bright yellow colour allows the pilot to easily identify any powerlines in a field which usually blend into grass.

I'm a licensed glider pilot, trained in landing in casual terrain, which is inherent feature of this sport. I'm pretty sure that the above is a terrible false. In fact, landing in rapeseed field is extremely dangerous. Rapeseed plants are very branched, and branches of neighbouring plants are entwined, so the whole field forms a dense carpet-like net. In addition, these plants are quite strong.

When you land in, for example, potatoes, your undercarriage meets and fells subsequent plants, which are big, but stand alone. They succumb under your wheels easily and gradually slow you down, as they absorb some of your kinetic energy. The same is true for most crops, but when you land in rapeseed, the rapeseed plants do not fall so easily as they support each other. They catch and hold your wheels as a net and don't allow to move further. It's very probable to tear your wheels off, cause a turnover or drive aircraft's nose into the ground.

It is even safer to land in a corn field or even a tree nursery than in rapeseed!

Moreover: bright yellow has nothing to do with powerlines recognition. The pylons indicate where the power lines go, and there is no problem if the wire blends into the grass - pilots look for pylons, not wires.

I decided to remove the quoted statements. This kind of false information can hurt someone.

--Grzes (talk) 11:42, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Curious inverted name

Is there any reason why people use both "rape seed oil" and "oil seed rape" as synonyms, but would never use , eg, both "sunflower seed oil" and "oil seed sunflower". Why do people invert the name? Is this a modern occurence, and if so what was the original name? 88.107.119.202 16:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well they aren't actually synonyms, because "rape seed oil" refers to the oil and "oil seed rape" refers to the plant. But the complex terminology is most likely an attempt to disambiguate from the crime in horticultural use. Pollinator 16:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
"Oilseed sunflowers" is common terminology to distinguish them from "confectionary sunflowers". That refers to the plants, not to their oil. Gene Nygaard 19:30, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hay Fever

Despite what I have just read. I know when Rape seed oil is in flower because it crucifies me.


Another comment - I lived near a field that for a couple of years was turned over the rape cultivation. My hayfever worsened considerably, as did my father's.

Further comment - I feel the hayfever issue has been side-stepped, as far as I am concerned it is an evil plant that gives me hayfever. Quote 'as rapeseed is an entomophilous crop, with pollen transfer primarily by insects' - is this why my car gets covered in a yellow dust??

Nutritional properties ?

Does anyone know what the nutritional properties of rapeseed oil is ? I have been using light olive oil but the rapeseed holds up better to high heat. I know that olive oil is safe and even beneficial in the diet - Need to know about these qualities in rapeseed oil. E Mail me @ ferlady@pacbell.net - Thank you.

Internet Myths/Urban Legends about rapeseed/canola oil

There are rampant lies on the topic on the internet, often spread in highly alarmist email with claims such as rape seed being related to mustard plants (true), which in turn are claimed to be the source of Mustard gas, the chemical weapon (Totally false: mustard gas is named that because it smells somewhat like mustard and NOT because of its origin). Other false claims include: canola oil causes mad cow disease, causes glaucoma, "emphysema, respiratory distress, anemia, constipation, irritability, and blindness in animals and humans" and a host of other ills[1]. I assume it is a combination of our society's common fear of the evils of the big corporation (it is usually claimed it was created by an evil industry empire), genetic engineering and technology in general (it is claimed to be genetically engineered, not true: though some common varieties are genetically engineered there are also full organic crops with no genetic engineering), and maybe the name itself, since "rape" causes such a heavy emotional reaction in many people... hard NOT to go "ick" at something called "rapeseed" - and no surprise they named the new strain "canola."

I think a section on this should be added - maybe just a short mention of the pervasive myth and its veracity. This might be the information people are looking for when they look it up, as seen by the first comment at the top of this page. Bigdoglover 11:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC) Just noticed I missed the links to debunking articles at the bottom. Still, should there be an actual paragraph on this? Bigdoglover 11:47, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Roundup Ready Controversy

I've added a paragraph pointing out that herbicide use in modern agriculture is so widespread that the biodiversity problem isn't limited to herbicide-tolerant crops. Also, by growing a different crop, and using a selective herbicide, the volunteer plants are quite easy to eliminate. From my experience as a farmer, now retired, I know these real problems have been exaggerated by campaigners. Unfortunately, a lot of the websites on this topic are produced by campaigns--verification is going to be tricky, and may depend on assembling a chain of references to show what's the common knowledge of the farmer. Zhochaka 09:33, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree. If I could grow "Round-Up ready" GMO rape (which we can't in Europe) I would not be at all worried about the volunteer rape being resistant to Round-Up (glyphosate) in following crops. I have added as little as 5g per hectare of Ally (metsulfuron-methyl ; DuPont) during stubble cleaning (the process of chemically clearing existing weeds prior to planting a new crop) with great success as rape is not very susceptible to the low (3 litres / hectare) doses of 380g glyphosate concentration Round-Up typically used in stubble cleaning anyway. Even if this didn't work, cultivation work would destroy the resistant rape volunteers, and even then, should a few survive, the broad-leaved weed herbicide used on the following wheat crop (Bifenox + Mecoprop, for example) would kill the remainder. If a handful of plants survived, it would not change the fact that they, whilst being resistant to Round-Up, would succumb to all other broad-leaved weed herbicides, of which there are litterally hundreds. So would any wild plants they bred with, although this idea is to all intents and purposes a figment of the environmental activist's imagination in any real sense.Tomcrisp7 13:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article really needs some clean-up. The last sentence of the second paragraph makes absolutely no sense. I don't think it meets standards for neutrality either. Facts about Rapeseed and myths about Rapeseed should be clearly separated into separate sections, or myths and opinions should not be mentioned at all. Instead of saying that people with allergies are psycho, try saying "one explanation offered is.." 66.122.246.153 03:38, 25 June 2006 (UTC)Sandy[reply]

Pests and diseases

Oh dear, oh dear. What this needs is the help of a producer or agronomist. I'll do this if you like when I have some time. We need to be talking about the most severe European pests and diseases such as Cabbage Leaf Flea Beetle and Phoma.Tomcrisp7 12:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a producer or agronomist from North America could do the same for the North American side ?Tomcrisp7 19:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canola

To my knowledge the word Canola is simply the North American terminology for rapeseed and does in no way refer to particular varieties (cultivar = a word only used in horticulture) nor refer to erucic asid content. Modern rape varieties are known as "Double 0" or "00" varieties as they have been bred to no longer contain the impurities that prevented its development for so long, erucic acid and "glucosinolates".Tomcrisp7 12:04, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canola is a trademarked variety of Rapeseed, Tom. The trademark is owned by the Canola Council of Canada; here are some references that you might find of interest:

http://www.canola-council.org/ind_definition.html
http://www.canola-council.org/ind_overview.html
http://www.canola-council.org/Rapeseed.aspx
http://www.canola-council.org/cooking_myths.html

-- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 14:05, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jim. Your link goes to a website that states:

"This new oilseed was christened “Canola” and there is a strict internationally regulated definition of canola that differentiates it from rapeseed, based upon it having less than two per cent erucic acid and less than 30 umoles glucosinolates. Therefore, oilseed products that do not meet this standard cannot use the trademarked term, canola. High erucic acid rapeseed acreage, although still present in Canada, is now confined to production under contract for specific industrial uses."

This states that Rapeseed cannot be called Canola if it has less than two per cent erucic acid and less than 30 umoles glucosinolates. This does not imply a particular variety of canola, it is a commercial definition norm for the oil products of all varieties of Canola / European "00" oilseed rape. Since the vast majority of modern varieties of commercially known Canola / European "00" oilseed rape meet these norms this would entitle all such growers and industrials to use the term when applied to these products. Example : the variety "Jet Neuf" (France 1982) produces oil of over 30 umoles glucosinolates, and therefore could not be referred to by the Canadian term Canola. On the other hand, the variety "Campala", an "00" variety (France 2003) has low levels and could be referred to as Canola although Europeans would not want to as there is no popular conception of the word in Europe as applied to this crop. Thank you for clearing that up. I think maybe you were confusing my use of the word "variety" which is the agricultural equivalent of the word cultivar. So may I propose a mutual conclusion that establishes that "Canola" is a Canadian (originally) term meaning "00" oilseed rape in Europe ? Tomcrisp7 14:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tom, the exact technical answer would be the definition given by the Canola Council of Canada at http://www.canola-council.org/ind_definition.html:
The official definition of canola is:
... an oil that must contain less than 2% erucic acid, and
the solid component of the seed must contain less than
30 micromoles of any one or any mixture of
3-butenyl glucosinolate, 4-pentenyl glucosinolate,
2-hydroxy-3 butenyl glucosinolate, and 2-hydroxy-
4-pentenyl glucosinolate per gram of air-dry, oil-free solid.
-- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 18:28, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks, so we can establish that Canola is not, as you claimed, a trademarked variety (cultivar) of rapeseed. We can establish that Canola is a trademark establishing a minimum inclusion of erucic acid and glucosinolates that applies to all varieties (cultivars) of the crop and the oil made from them, and that only European "double 0" rapeseeds and their oils could be given the name Canola if the Europeans so desired. May I ask whether in North America farmers differenciate between "Rapeseed" and "canola" crops ? I suspect that Canola is the populist generic term for all rapeseed there as I have never heard any American up until now use the words rape, rapeseed or oilseed rape. In fact I have often had to translate "rapeseed" to "canola" for American friends in order for them to understand what I was talking about.

Taking your last point first, Tom, no; "Canola" is not a generic term for rapeseed. By way of analogy, all jets are planes; all planes are not jets. Canola is a subset of rapeseed that must meet the Canola Council of Canada definition. Some of the links above give the historical background of how the Canola variant was originally bred from rapeseed. To the best of my knowledge, Tom, "Canola" continues to be a trademarked term. You can find trademark references quickly if you google for "canola" and "trademark". For example:
http://canola-council.org/PDF/canola/english/milestones21.pdf
http://www.hart.purdue.edu/newcrop/ncnu02/v5-122.html
http://www.canola.ab.ca/tec/gml/shtml
It may be (and this is simply a guess) that "Canola" remains a trademarked term, while "canola" has become an accepted generic term for anything that meets the Canola Council of Canada definition. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 19:37, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is not acceptable for the article to say "one particular cultivar, Canola". This should be changed to a phrase referring to a trademark defining minimum quality standards for oilseeds and oil. By all means cross reference to the Canola Council but I fear you are misunderstanding the big picture here. Canola is not a cultivar of rape, the Canola council do not pretend that it is. Also, for the benefit of Europeans who have no familiarity with the term, the article should say something like "...the crop and its oil are known by the term Canola in North America". You seem to think I am disputing the idea of the Canola trademark. I am not. But this is not the priority usage of the term among professionals, as you would know if you were from an agricultural background. I do not go around saying I am a grower of "double 0" rapeseed, as there is no need, the default term is rapeseed in Europe, and is Canola in North America. Oilseed rape and oil that would not meet the Canola Council standards is no longer grown in Europe, and to my knowledge, in North America, except for specialist contracts. That this specialist minority crop and its oil should not be referred to as Canola, tell that to all the American farmers who only know of the word "Canola".

Here is an extract from:

http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxcanola.html

"Canola" is defined as any of several varieties of the rape plant having seeds that contain less than 2% erucic acid, and whose solid component contains less than 30 micromoles per gram of glucosinolates. (This has been the statutory definition in Canada since 1986.) If you ever come across rapeseed oil that is *not* canola, avoid it, because erucic acid causes heart lesions, and glucosinolates cause thyroid enlargement and poor feed conversion!
Rape plants have been grown in Europe since the 13th century; rapeseed oil was used in Asia and Europe originally in lamps, and later as a cooking oil. Canola was developed between 1958 and 1974 by two Canadian scientists, Baldur Stefansson and Richard Downey.
Dictionaries have variously explained "canola" as standing for "Canada oil, low acid", and as a blend of "Canada" and "colza". I imagine that "Mazola" (a brand name for corn [= "maize"] oil) had an influence.
"Canola" was originally a trademark in Canada, but is now a generic term. It's the only term one is now likely to encounter there on packaging and in newspapers and books; some sources do say that canola was "formerly called rape". But the term "rape" still has some currency among Canadian farmers. (Although "rape" denoting the plant is etymologically unconnected with "rape" meaning forced sexual intercourse, the homonymy doubtless contributed to the former term's falling into disfavour.)
The Canola Council of Canada, based in Winnipeg, Manitoba, told me that "Canola" was registered as a trademark in 1978 (that's one year before MWCD10's 1979) by the Western Canadian Oilseed Crushers' Association, and that control of the term was transferred in 1980 to the Rapeseed Association of Canada, which changed its name to the Canola Council of Canada the same year. They say that the origin is simply "Canadian oil", that "it's not an acronym", and that rapeseed oil that does not meet the criteria for canola should still be called "rapeseed oil"".

Note the part : "Canola" was originally a trademark in Canada, but is now a generic term"; whearas you just said "Taking your last point first, Tom, no; "Canola" is not a generic term for rapeseed".

You seem to think "Canola" is a cultivar (variety) whearas it is clearly not.

Tomcrisp7 08:11, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tom, I didn't put the word "cultivar" in the article. I'm not specifically arguing for it. I said canola was a "trademarked variety of rapeseed" that must meet the Canola Council of Canada's definition. If it's the word "variety" that bothers you, I'm happy to use the word "subset". As to the current trademark status of Canola, I literally don't know. I find conflicting sources, many of which assert the trademark status, and others that say the term has become generic. Finally, I said "canola is not a generic term for rapeseed", and that seems to be the significant sticking point for you. I believe you are saying that something like the following: "Europeans understand rapeseed to mean modern 00 varieties only, therefore all rapeseed according to this understanding is canola." Can you explain this part of your argument once more? You seem to be redefining the subset (canola) as a synonym for all varieties of the crop (rapeseed). Given that non-canola rapeseed is still grown, this is the part of your argument that I honestly don't understand. Google the term "non-canola rapeseed". Can you explain once more why you believe "canola" is a synonym for "rapeseed"? -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs) 15:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the problem with the article at the moment is that it basically says that rapeseed oil is not fit for human consumption and that canola is a type of rapeseed oil which has been bred to be safe. The implication that rapeseed oil which is not called canola is unsafe is pretty alarming considering there is no such word as canola in the UK. Someone who found this article because they wanted to make a recipe they found on a US website and googled canola to find out what it was might well not feel clear that it is exactly the same stuff they can buy in any supermarket labelled as rapeseed oil or vegetable oil. At the moment the article makes it sound like the UK has laxer food standards than the US and Canada and have a lot of potentially dodgy bottles of oilseed rape on our shelves.

Cultivation and uses

I would dispute the comment that "rapeseed is primarily cultivated for animal feed". As a producer, I believe this crop is classified as an "oilseed", and the commercial organisation for production and sale is directed to oil tituration plants. The rape meal is considered a by-product. The EU support scheme also classes rape as an oilseed.

As a dairy producer I would say that rape meal at around 35% protein is fatally flawed as a competitor to soya meal at 45% protein as it is less concentrated. Also the trituration plants use high temperature ether extraction methods which "cook" the resulting meal leading to loss of digestibility. Therefore you never know in advance when you order a 27 tonne load whether the product is going to be good or "cooked". Cold pressed rape meal is a better product and can be produced by small scale farm biodiesel projects. You are correct about the problem with GM guarantees. This mainly affects organic producers.Tomcrisp7 11:53, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the emphasis on 'cattle feed' is a result of the original marketing campaign. Whole Rape is not suitable for cattle at all (because of the Erucic acid content)so the original Canola variety was developed. The latter sales and marketing efforts to worry the food regulators into recommending this variety in response to the magic'ed up fears to human health came latter, (humans can actually digest erucic acid very well, and poor Indians who still cook with it have been found have less heart disease than those who can afford 'healthier' oils). So at the time this was (by definition) Canola's only Unique_selling_proposition. This aspect or benefit (ie. you can also feed it to cattle) was exaggerated to get a point across to the would be purchaser. So, yes, you are probable right that the article needs to be brought into line with reality. --Aspro 11:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

roundup ready rapeseed

I understand roundup ready rapeseed is supposed to be a non-fertile hybrid, so it shouldn't self-sow - if it does self-sow, how are you supposed to kill it?Garrie 06:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

cultivation

it is mentioned that it is grown as a winter-cover crop - but this doesn't go far enough in saying that it is grown with the normal ceral cultivation machinery, as a part of a rotational cropping system eg controlling diseases and using different nutrient proportions to wheat, oats etc.Garrie 06:14, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really think use of the rapeseed meal should be seperated out from cultivation. it may only be a by-product but it is economically important both to rapeseed production and to the feedlotting industries.Garrie 06:15, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

China Incident Under Health Section

It appears that the connection between the rapeseed oil and the stampede is purely coincidental. It doesn't belong in the article at all - and especially under the Health section. There is no need to take every bit of news trivia and carelessly stick it in wikipedia. 75.18.212.211 03:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to explain where it got its name

Article needs to explain where it got its name. And I'd like to know. "Rape-seed" ??? Where did that come from? And how does this have to do with rape? William Ortiz (talk) 03:20, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The lead already explains the etymology. Oli Filth(talk) 22:34, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not very well. William Ortiz 19:12, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Suck my dick? 76.167.45.203 (talk) 05:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fact tags

It has been tagged for over half a year, and the bits that are likely myths are still in the article, uncited. Should be time soon to delete the worse half of the article. Narayanese (talk) 19:22, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rapeseed or rape

Is this vegetable more commonly known as 'rapeseed' internationally? I have always heard of the plant referred to as rape, and the seed only as rapesee.99.224.220.52 (talk) 16:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]