Vegetable-Breed Time Capsules in Renaissance Whimsy

Just throwing this out there. Has there been an attempt to track the meandering flow of selective breeding of fruits, vegetables and flowers by using still life paintings since the Renaissance?

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Just throwing this out there.

Has there been an attempt to track the meandering flow of selective breeding of fruits, vegetables and flowers by using still life paintings since the Renaissance? Are any vegetables significantly different in say, these face illusions by Giuseppe Arcimboldo (~1526-1593) than they would appear now?

According to the Carrot Museum, orange carrots were not bred into existence until the 1700s: are those some sort of pale variants of the original purple or yellow making up The Gardener's beard, above?


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


(Digression: the World Carrot Museum is a website full of fascinating history. Best visited with a bowl of hearty carrot ginger soup and plenty of time to enjoy the stories.)

I think Arcimboldo's paintings could be wonderful examples to show how differences created by selective breeding can produce drastic, vigorous changes. Instructive, perhaps, for people unsure about GMOs and maintaining a diet of "all-natural" veggies or people dubious by modern cross-breeding. Changes now can now be potentially more targeted, and more rapid, but few vegetables on our table resemble their wild ancestors.

Too bad Arcimboldo never lived long enough to incorporate brusselkale or broccoflower into his portraits.

 

- -

Click on on each image to see their Wikipedia lineage.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe