Today, the yield of rice per mu here has reached 1,200 kilograms, and tomorrow it may exceed 1,300 kilograms. "Half Moon Talk" raises a question in this regard: Agricultural experiments are a rigorous scientific research method, where does the strange phenomenon of "breaking records at the first test" come from?
Agricultural experiments "broke records at the first test," violated scientific laws, and were full of all kinds of deceptions, which can be called a new "Great Leap Forward." Just like the "high-yield satellites" in the past, today's "breaking the record at the first test" is also a blatant data fraud. For example, it has been reported that there are various methods of cheating in the yield measurement regulations, some deliberately leave the spacing of rice very wide in the sowing process, and then quietly transplant the same varieties sown elsewhere to the test field a few days before harvest; What's more, the prepared rice is hidden in advance, and when harvesting, it is mixed into the rice with the measured yield and passed off. More insidious cheating methods occur in the planting process: it is said to be "seawater rice", but in fact it uses fresh water irrigation without restraint; In order to pursue good data, a large number of chemical fertilizers and yield enhancers were invested in the experimental field, and a number of professional and technical personnel were arranged to manage the ......
The income of one mu of experimental field is two or three thousand, but the cost of the test is five or six thousand, what is the significance of the ultra-high yield obtained in this way? Some local departments and related associations direct and perform on their own, acting as both referees and athletes, plus some experts who have charged "consulting fees" to cooperate with the performance, which seems to have turned production measurement itself into an "industry". The yield test results are ridiculously good, the article is very beautifully written, the report is a big stack, the political performance is a head, and the agricultural enterprises sell seeds have gimmicks, but in essence, it is shameless cheating and boring word games.
The report also mentioned that the constantly refreshing "records" have put many scientific researchers, especially young scholars, under the pressure of heavier ratings and promotions, and under the guidance of the results of "getting the article out first, then talking", some agricultural scientific research that should have been rigorous and standardized has changed its taste. This is by no means normal.
Whether the variety is good or not, the market has the most right to judge, and the farmers have the most right to speak. No matter how beautiful the data of "one test will break the record", if it is not recognized in the market and farmers are unwilling to plant, such varieties will not be better in any case. In fact, only varieties that are recognized by the market and can be planted by farmers are really good varieties. For this reason, the mouth of the production test should be tightened, and the strange phenomenon of "breaking the record at the first test" should be resolutely curbed. Otherwise, the agricultural experimental field will only drive out the bad money and the good money, and those who are at ease engaged in scientific research will have nowhere to go, but the ** who cheats can be popular. In the long run, the market's trust in the yield measurement data will become lower and lower, and it will be difficult to promote really good varieties.
In the experimental field, the "seawater rice" was mixed with fresh water, and the agricultural experiment "broke the record at the first test" ......In the final analysis, behind all kinds of strange phenomena is the adulteration of data for scientific research, scientific research for political achievements, and scientific research is kidnapped by interests. We must be vigilant against high-yield fraud under the packaging of scientific research, and we must be more vigilant against the exaggerated style of the seed industry under the trend of yield measurement. Whether the variety is good or not, and what the yield is, should ask the farmers more, rather than just looking at the yield data. The "release of high-yield satellites" in agricultural experimental fields should never be allowed. In this regard, the fraudsters should be held accountable for academic misconduct in scientific research fraud, and if the relevant varieties involve false propaganda to farmers, they should be held legally responsible for defrauding public and private property by fabricating facts or concealing the truth for the purpose of illegal possession.
Chengdu Business Daily).