Did you know that hybrid vegetables can be toxic? If you are a strong proponent of heirlooms, you are probably jumping up and down with joy, and if you grow a lot of hybrids, you are probably wondering if I have lost my marbles! Let me be clear, most hybrids are perfectly safe to eat, but there are a few special cases where they are not safe.
Understanding these cases of toxic hybrid vegetables provides insights into the risk of saving seeds and using natural means to develop new cultivars.
What is a Hybrid?
The term “hybrid” is used in two different ways. Some consider a hybrid as being the result of crossing two specific cultivars to produce special seed. For example, my favorite tomato is the Sweet 100, which is a hybrid seed produced by hand crossing two specific cultivars.
There is also a more general use of the term where a hybrid is the product of crossing any two individual plants. This could be man-made or the result of an open-pollinated cross. Any gardener who crosses two plants is producing a hybrid, and most naturally produced vegetable seed in a garden is also a hybrid.
The alternative is the heirloom. It is a plant that has been line-bred for some 50 years, resulting in a stable cultivar. Crossing two individuals of the same cultivar is not considered to be a hybrid, although technically, such a cross does produce a hybrid because two individual heirloom plants are not 100% identical from a genetic perspective.
This blog uses the more general use of the term hybrid.
All Vegetables Are Toxic
That heading might surprise you, but the only way a plant can fend off pests is to produce natural pesticides, and plants make thousands of different ones. Many of them are not only toxic to pests but also to us. 99.9% of the pesticides we eat are these natural pesticides.
Why don’t these pesticides harm us? There are two important points to understand. First, the level of these pesticides is quite low, and so they do not harm us, at least they don’t harm us enough to cause concern. The second point is that we have evolved eating fruits and vegetables for a very long time, and our bodies have developed great mechanisms to overcome these toxic substances.
Check out this FREE 10-part Vegetable Growing Master Class.
When Breeding Hybrids Goes Wrong
Almost none of the vegetables we eat today resemble wild versions of the food. Humans have been breeding and improving them for hundreds, if not thousands of years. This is usually done in one of two ways. We play god and move pollen from one plant to another to see what happens. We then select the best offspring and repeat the process, over and over again.
The second option is to let nature do her thing. We just harvest seed and keep an eye out for the best plant. Then we collect seeds from it, and do it all over again the following year.
Both methods produce food with desirable features, such as large size, good taste, easy to grow, and pest-free. Why would the new, better hybrids be pest-free? In many cases, it’s because the selected hybrid produces more natural pesticides. If the amount of pesticide is just a bit higher, we end up with a plant that is pest-free but still good to eat. If things go wrong, the hybrid has such high levels of natural pesticides that it becomes toxic to us. Let’s have a look at some of these cases.
The Toxic Lenape Potato
Potatoes are part of the nightshade family, and they all produce toxic alkaloids (glycoalkaloids). The amount found in commercial potatoes is normally low enough that we can handle them. If you allow potatoes to sit in the sun, the skin gets green while at the same time building up the level of an alkaloid called solanine. At some point, the amount is high enough that it is toxic to us, and it should not be eaten.
In an effort to produce a great potato for making chips, breeders used conventional breeding methods to develop a variety called Lenape. After a successful commercial launch, it was found to have a dangerously high level of solanine and was removed from the market. It did make great chips, though! The average Russet potato contains about 8 mg/100 g of solanine, while the Lenape has 30 mg/100 g. The Lenape potato is still used for breeding because of its pest resistance, but offspring are tested for alkaloid content, as are most new varieties of potatoes.
A similar high-solanine potato was removed from the market in Sweden in 1995. In this case, the cultivar was a heirloom variety developed in the UK in the nineteenth century, called Magnum Bonum.
A hybrid potato produced from two species, S. tuberosum and S. brevidens, produces the normal alkaloids but also a new toxin called demissidine, which was not present in either parent. Traditional breeding methods were used to create this hybrid, illustrating the danger of mixing thousands of genes together without controls. This is something the anti-GMO crowd needs to understand.
Toxic Celery
Celery naturally produces toxic chemicals called psoralens, which help it fend off insects and some diseases. These are natural products that are also found in limes, lemons, bergamot, parsley, figs, and cloves. Celery plants that contain higher levels of psoralens are not chewed up by pests and are therefore more appealing to consumers, so breeders inadvertently select for high levels. If celery suffers from disease or has been bruised, it can produce up to 100 times the normal level of psoralens. Unfortunately, such celery produces photodermatitis in workers handling the product, both in the field and in grocery stores.
Psoralens are also responsible for the allergic blistering caused by giant hogweed.
Kiwi Allergies
Kiwi fruit, sometimes called Chinese gooseberry, is one of the newest types of fruit on the market. The original plant was edible but unpalatable until breeders in New Zealand turned it into the fruit we know today. There is no evidence that it has ever undergone any kind of premarket safety analysis. Recently, an allergenic protein (actinidin) was isolated and characterized (1998).
When someone has a kiwi allergy, their immune system reacts negatively to substances in the fruit, and they often experience allergic reactions to other foods, which is known as cross-sensitivity. They can even become allergic to latex gloves. This allergy can be severe and can cause anaphylaxis shock.
Toxic Squash Syndrome
Cucurbits like cucumber and zucchini produce a bitter-tasting compound called cucurbitacins. These fruits are normally grown so that they contain low levels of cucurbitacins since people don’t like the taste. When curcurbits cross pollinate with each other the seeds can produce hybrid plants that have unusually high levels of cucurbitacins. When eaten, they cause a form of food poisoning called toxic squash syndrome, which can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and even hair loss.
The fruit produced by such pollination is safe to eat. However, the seeds from such fruit may produce a plant that has toxic fruit. If the fruit tastes bitter, it should be discarded.
Toxic squash syndrome seed can also be found in commercial sources. Mr Fothergill’s, a seed company, had to recall a batch of Courgette Zucchini that could contain seeds which produce bitter-tasting fruits.
Hybrids vs GMOs
There is a strong belief in some circles that GMOs carry a much higher risk compared to traditional breeding or “natural” pollination done by bees. Once you understand that conventional breeding is much less targeted and has much less testing and oversight, you begin to understand why so many scientists agree that GMO is a safer alternative.
Are Hybrids Safe?
Are you now scared to use hybrids? Don’t be. The point of this post is not to scare you, but to make you aware that natural breeding can produce toxic food.
What about heirlooms? If the gardener controls the cross-breeding, and insects don’t get in the way and do things wrong, heirlooms might be slightly safer, but I assure you, most gardeners do not take the precautions needed to guarantee that no unscheduled cross-pollination takes place. In practice, saving heirloom seeds from most crops is not any safer than using hybrids.
Heirloom Seed Myths – Are They Worth Buying?
“There is a strong belief in some circles that GMO caries a much higher risk compared to traditional breeding or “natural” pollination done by bees. Once you understand that conventional breeding is much less targeted and has much less testing and oversight, you begin to understand why so many scientists agree that GMO is a safer alternative.”
The question here is, why hasn’t conventional breeding been more targeted, tested, and given oversight?
Scientists love creating, exploring, wondering and testing, and that’s wonderful. But how much oversight do they have? How much long-term research before their award winning ego-puffing breakthroughs are foisted on the gullible as the best thing since sliced bread? What percentage of laboratory-created chemicals have had deleterous and toxic effects?
Mr Pavlis, sometimes I doubt the objectivity a scientist needs. A purveyor of science may have vested interests, needs science to be seen as better than nature. Otherwise what’s the point? Then there’s the bias. Accolades and money for more research becomes the main motivator for some. I know a prof of toxicology in Chicago. He left the post because of the backstabbing, undermining and competiveness in the industry, of which he was one of the victims. Science is not pure, and not always entirely honest. I know there are honest people and dishonest people in every group. It’s necessary to weed out [pun not intended] the cheats so that honest people can fulfil their proper function, not gloss over the problems.
“The question here is, why hasn’t conventional breeding been more targeted, tested, and given oversight?” – it can’t be more targeted. The breeders have no idea which genes they are moving, or how they will function together.
When you let nature randomly match up thousands of genes, by a method that is based on chance – you can be more targeted.
breeders don’t just mix any pollen and pistil – they are selective. But they have limited control.
“The question… is: why hasn’t conventional breeding been more targeted, tested, and given oversight?” It HAS been “targeted”… as long as mankind has practiced agriculture. The world problems that occurred with rising population, meant that starvation was liable to occur with unexpected weather or growing conditions. Starvation on massive scales, was impossible for some of us to ignore. So, “How do we feed those in need?” For drought, plants which can withstand it better; for insect and organism plagues, plants which are more resistant, etc. Then there are the areas in the world where farming is just dicey because it’s on the edge of suitable conditions such as early frost or late springs, so hardier plants would guarantee success. Of course, “success” relies on many, many diverse factors but agriculturalists and their research attempt to overcome the obstacles. There there is the economic factor. More abundant produce without increasing the need for more land and bigger equipment is always a goal. Those of us who in the 1960’s were at university and deeply troubled by the starvation of people in far-flung locations, were exultant with advances in breeding “better” crops, and lauded the developments in hybridization.
You also mentioned problems within agriculture research. Knowing one person who claims to have experienced “backstabbing” and other unethical behavior is in NO WAY evidence of a corrupt system. If your acquaintance actually was a victim, then THAT particular episode should be investigated, and the perpetrators should be disciplined, but it does not follow that all others are guilty of such behavior.
Then “How much long-term research before their…breakthroughs are foisted on the gullible…?” The answer is years and years, sometimes decades and longer. Even when a “breakthrough” happens, the results of that also undergo testing. These aren’t “cowboys” in our laboratories. Research work can be drudgery and it’s always controlled and governed by protocols, restrained by rules of science and of industry. Then, there is the publication of the research which must be duplicated and examined by other researchers to determine its validity. In your comment you seem to conflate conspiracy with the routine of research in agronomy and agriculture. Unlike what we see in the Netflix films, breakthroughs do not stand alone. They occur in CONNECTIONS with research, worldwide which has gone before.
Fascinating topic! I had actually been wondering about this happening in my own garden. I grew Wonderberries this summer. In the past I have found some sort of weed in the Nightshade family in the yard. I haven’t found any in recent years, but there may still be some in the neighborhood. I saved some Wonderberry seed (although they produce bountifully the fruits are fragile and the taste was okay but not something I couldn’t live without) but it probably could easily hybridize with whatever Nightshade weed is around. But wouldn’t a poisonous fruit taste bitter?
“wouldn’t a poisonous fruit taste bitter?” – not necessarily. Every poison, just like every chemical tastes different to us.
Fascinating and very informative. Thank you.
Excellent post! Decades ago I took a graduate course in environmental toxicology in which many of the toxins found naturally in foods were mentioned. There is a saying: “The dose makes the poison.”
Interesting to me since I have reactions to most fruits and vegetables since I had covid. It is made a huge change in my life to the point I cannot eat any food that I have not handled.I cannot eat out, I can only eat peeled pears and the occasional peeled green or yellow delicious apple. Anyhting else and my face swells up and I get hives.
Organic food-is actually worse forme because the plants have to build up stronger defences than the sprayed ones.
Good article.
But what annoys me most about the anti anti-GMO crowd is that they seem to think we’re all idiotic luddites.
Show me a case where GMO food currently in the commercial marketplace (not the lab) was made more flavorful or nutritious. Good luck with that. Golden Rice is the only exception I’m aware of, and it’s not available (yes, due to idiotic luddites).
GMOs are demonstrably for one thing and one thing only: increasing profits. If we all have to suffer crappier food quality as the result, who cares?
The Klee lab identified the flavor genes in tomatoes. they then had two choices to get them into plants; traditional breeding or GMO. They chose conventional because they were afraid nobody would buy the GMO seeds.
Times are changing, we can expect all kinds of better tasting food due to GMO techniques.
Yes, and the next idea being proposed is… food in tablet form. No–one’s going to protest too loudly at its advent, having never tasted much more than cardboard.
What they haven’t had they won’t miss, and the oldies who remember will be laughed at.
Your comment is a diatribe, which doesn’t contribute information to the thoughtful discussion of this topic. IF you really do believe what you’ve contended, would you give some background and some evidence that your assessment and predictions: that our food is tasteless and the consumers don’t and won’t care, are well-founded?
Food in tablet-form, could save many lives…thousands of lives. It could be EASILY transported to areas of disaster and to people who are living on the margins of malnutrition.
But I am curious: What plant foods have tasted like “cardboard” to you? (I’m aware of “cardboard food” because I had that unfortunate experience during cancer treatments).
I would agree that ripened fruit in a garden is a joy to taste, but transported food, available in our super-markets is also flavorful. Proper preparation is a large part of the deliciousness of food, and understanding the chemistry of the cooking of our vast variety of foods will greatly enhance the meal that is produced.
I remember a case of a gardener dying after eating squash casserole cooked by his wife in Germany. I had looked it up, it seems they got the courgette / Zucchini from a neighbour, and the seeds had perhaps been cross pollinated with ornamental pumpkin, the courgette/ squash itself had tasted bitter, but the husband had been too polite to ask about it and kept on eating. When he went to an emergency room hours later it was too late as the toxins could not be stopped or had done the damage.
Since then I keep telling my kids to look out for this or check cucumbers myself for bitterness, assuming that bitter cucumbers contain the same toxins
it is weird that the back-to-nature-brigade keep insisting on wild plants being superior, completely ignoring those issues with the defensive toxins….
and I once gave a little talk on the history of the potatoe and remember that the early cultivars imported from the Amerikas contained some proteins that scratched in your throat and have been removed by breeding over the time
and I did not know about the Kiwi and its potential allergenics