Some plants do this by putting a pause on productivity until the weather improves. In our recently published research, we discovered which genes control the “pause-and-play” mechanism of plant growth and are key for the survival of Canada’s crops.

Our goal is to understand the genetic factors that control growth so they can eventually be used to improve the ability of Canadian and global crops to handle weather stresses like drought, heat and cold temperatures.

A changing climate means extreme weather events are becoming more frequent. These findings could help create climate-resilient, genetically engineered crops that can recover faster and more efficiently after climate shocks.

These plants might be more likely to complete their life cycle and produce food during the harvest season, even after experiencing snowstorms, heat waves or flooding.

How plants handle weather stress

To get an idea of how plants tolerate stress, we measured root growth under a series of environmental stresses that Canadian and globally relevant crops commonly face throughout their life cycles. These included cold temperatures, salt stress and drought-like conditions. For our first experiments, we used thale cress (Arabidopsis thaliana).

Roots are particularly useful for this type of research because they grow continuously and respond quickly to environmental change.

By measuring root length over time, we could see when growth slowed down and when it resumed. We tested the root length in model organism.

We found that tested plants paused their root growth when exposed to cold or salt stress. When the stress was removed and the plants returned to normal growing conditions, root growth resumed as normal within about 24 hours.

However, plants did not respond the same way to every type of stress. We found that plants can recover from osmotic or drought stress, but it takes a little longer for them to do so. We referred to that dynamic as “pause and push” because plants need time to push through and recover.

To test whether the same stress response occurs in other plant species, we partnered with researchers from the United States Department of Agriculture. Together, we repeated the experiments using two wild grasses that are closely related to major cereal crops: brachypodium (Brachypodium distachyon) and annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum).

The grasses showed similar patterns of stress response and recovery. That suggests the mechanism that pauses and restarts growth may be shared across many plant species.

Pinpointing stress-recovery genes

Observing these dynamics is one thing, but how can scientists figure out what’s going on at the genetic and molecular level?

One common approach is to attach a fluorescent marker to genes of interest. Scientists often use a green fluorescent protein, originally discovered in jellyfish, that glows under specific light.

When this protein is inserted into a plant genome, researchers can fuse it to a gene of interest to see when and where that gene becomes active as it lights up inside cells.

We knew that the lack of growth during stress was due to a decrease in cell division, so we targeted genes related to cell division. Using fluorescent markers, we observed how the plant cells lit up differently in response to stress and stress recovery.

After counting thousands of cells for months, we could see certain genes were present in fewer cells when plants were under cold, drought and salt stress. However, within about 24 hours of being put back into optimal growth conditions, their numbers returned to normal.

One gene stood out in particular: Cyclin-dependent Kinase A;1 (CDKA;1). This gene helps regulate the cell cycle, the process that controls when cells divide and grow. A related gene named CDK1 exists in animals and humans, where it performs similar functions.

After performing more experiments targeting CDKA;1 in plants, we found that inhibiting the gene prevented plants from recovering from cold and salt stress. This suggests CDKA;1 plays a vital role in helping plants resume growth once environmental conditions stabilize.

Supporting food security

Our focus is on helping crops recover faster. We can’t stop heat waves or snowstorms. Pinpointing genes, however, can help plants recover from these events and still produce in time for harvest.

Understanding these genes opens the door to new approaches in crop breeding. Researchers could look for natural variants of these genes that already exist in crop populations. Traditional breeding programs could then select for varieties that recover faster after stress.

Another option is modern gene-editing tools such as CRISPR. This tool allows scientists to make precise changes to a plant’s DNA, including strengthening or adjusting genes involved in stress recovery.

As our research progresses, we hope to adjust the genetics of these Canadian crop varieties and create our own CRISPR-edited lines that are better able to cope with a changing climate.

Improving stress recovery could also expand where crops can be grown. Regions that currently experience unpredictable weather or short growing seasons may become more suitable for agriculture if crops can recover quickly after stress.

For Canada, this could help stabilize production in areas where climate variability is increasing. For the global food system, it could make crops better equipped to handle the environmental uncertainty expected in the coming decades.

By identifying the genes that allow plants to pause growth during stress and restart, we’re beginning to understand a critical survival strategy in plants. This knowledge can eventually help ensure crops continue to produce reliable harvests in a changing climate.

—Arif Ashraf is an assistant professor in the University of British Columbia’s department of botany. Olivia Hazelwood is a PhD student in the department of botany.

The post OPINION: Understanding how plants pause and restart growth can help develop climate-resilient crops appeared first on Country Guide.

This seasonal storage underpins water security across much of the country. Prairie agriculture depends heavily on mountain snowpack for irrigation. The Great Lakes basin relies on snowmelt to sustain spring inflows that support navigation, ecosystems and freshwater withdrawals. Hydropower systems in British Columbia and Quebec depend on snow accumulation and melt timing in upland watersheds.

WHY IT MATTERS: Farmers on the Prairies rely on mountain snowpack for irrigation, the Great Lakes basin relies on snowmelt to sustain spring inflows, and hydroelectricity systems in B.C. and Quebec also depend on snow accumulation in upland watersheds.

For decades, scientists and water managers have relied on snow water equivalent (SWE) to measure this winter water reservoir. SWE estimates how much liquid water snowpack would produce if melted instantly. It is physically intuitive and remains central to seasonal water forecasting.

But climate change is altering not only how much snow falls, but where snowpack persists and how long it lasts. Warmer winters are bringing more rain instead of snow, more frequent mid-winter melt events and shorter snow-cover duration. In many regions, peak snowpack now arrives earlier. Snow cover is becoming more intermittent, particularly during early winter and spring transitions.

These changes expose a limitation in traditional SWE measurements at large spatial scales. As temperatures rise, snow may disappear across large portions of a landscape while remaining deep in isolated patches. Under such conditions, the average snow water equivalent can appear stable even though the snow-covered area has shrunk substantially.

To address this limitation, colleagues and I have introduced a complementary metric called snow water availability (SWA). Rather than averaging snow water across an entire area, SWA estimates how much water exists within the portion of the landscape that is covered with snow. The metric combines SWE with satellite measurements or climate reanalysis estimates of the fraction of snow cover over the landscape. The result is a measure particularly sensitive to patchy snow, a condition that is becoming more common in a warmer climate.

Snow water availability

Using our SWA metric, we conduct a large-scale analysis across Canada and Alaska and have found pronounced differences in how snow water is changing. In northern and eastern regions, snow water availability has increased in recent decades. In some Arctic and sub-Arctic areas, reduced sea ice and warmer air temperatures enhance atmospheric moisture, increasing snowfall in northern regions.

However, in Western Canada, especially within the Rocky Mountains, significant declines in SWA are emerging in mid-elevation mountain headwaters. These regions feed major river drainage systems, including the Saskatchewan, Fraser and Columbia river basins.

The response of mountain snowpack to warming is strongly elevation-dependent. High alpine zones, where winter temperatures remain well below freezing, can retain relatively stable snowpacks. Low elevations may already experience intermittent snow.

However, mid-elevation transitional zones, where winter temperatures frequently hover near freezing, are especially climate-sensitive. Small temperature increases can shift precipitation from snow to rain, shorten snow-cover duration and accelerate melt timing and rate.

This creates an important asymmetry. Although overall, SWA has increased across Canada and Alaska between 2000 and 2019, gains in sparsely populated northern regions do not compensate for losses in southern and western headwaters where water demand is highest.

In addition, mountain regions function as natural water towers. When snow storage declines there, the effects propagate downstream through entire river basins. Where snow disappears can matter more for water supply reliability than how much accumulates elsewhere. The geography of loss matters.

Uneven snowpack

The impacts can be amplified when declines in western headwaters coincide with widespread but less statistically pronounced decreases downstream. Combined, these patterns influence drainage basins that support a large share of Canada’s population and economic activity.

Historical events underscore this vulnerability. The 2015 Western Canada snow drought reduced streamflow originating in Rocky Mountain headwaters, stressing municipal systems, agriculture and aquatic ecosystems. During the winter of 2011-2012, reduced snowpack in southern Ontario and Quebec contributed to depressed Great Lakes water levels, affecting shipping and water management.

Climate variability adds further complexity. Large-scale ocean–atmosphere patterns can amplify or temporarily offset warming effects from year to year. Some winters remain snow-rich; others are dominated by rain-on-snow and/or mid-winter melt events. But long-term warming increases the likelihood of SWA loss in patchy snow regimes across climate-sensitive elevations.

Despite its advantages, our proposed SWA is not free of uncertainty. Snow observations remain sparse in remote northern and high-elevation regions. Satellite products are affected by cloud cover, vegetation and polar nights.

Climate reanalysis rely on modelling assumptions that vary among models and products. While basin-scale trends can be detected with reasonable confidence, uncertainty increases at finer spatial scales, where slope orientation, vegetation, terrain details and microclimate greatly affect SWA.

As water management decisions increasingly require sub-basin precision, improving spatial resolution and physical realism in snow monitoring becomes essential. Future research will require improved satellite observations, enhanced land-surface modelling and expanded ground-based monitoring networks.

In a warming climate, understanding how much snow exists, where it persists, how fragmented it becomes and how quickly it disappears will be central to anticipating water supply risks.

Canada’s snowpack is not simply shrinking or growing; it is becoming more uneven. And in an uneven landscape, the location of loss can matter more than the total amount of gain.

Ali Nazemi is an associate engineer of building, civil and environmental engineering at Concordia University in Montreal.

The post OPINION: Canada’s shifting snowpack reveals water-loss location matters for agriculture appeared first on Country Guide.

Markets have reacted to the global impact of closing this incredibly busy shipping channel, focusing on the risk to oil and gas flows, the prospect of higher crude prices and the inflationary pressures that would follow.

That concern is justified. But it captures only part of the story. A sustained disruption of traffic through Hormuz would not simply constitute an energy crisis. It would also represent a fertilizer shock (where prices go up dramatically and supply goes down) – and, by extension, a direct risk to global food security.

WHY IT MATTERS: A third of globally traded urea passes through the Straight of Hormuz. The Persian Gulf also offers access to some of the world’s cheapest natural gas, which is essential for ammonia production.

Modern agriculture runs not only on sunlight and soil, but on natural gas. When German chemists Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch developed their nitrogen fixation method in the early 20th century, they did more than just manufacture ammonia at scale.

They launched a global chemical revolution that remains a cornerstone of modern civilization and agriculture. Through this process, methane is transformed into ammonia, and ammonia into nitrogen fertilizers such as urea – the most widely used nitrogen fertilizer. Those fertilizers allow crops to reach the yields on which today’s global population depends. Without it, harvests of wheat, maize and rice would fall dramatically.

Around a third of globally traded urea passes through the Strait of Hormuz. The Persian Gulf sits at the centre of this system for two structural reasons. First, it offers access to some of the world’s cheapest natural gas, essential for ammonia production.

Second, over decades, vast capital investments have built ammonia and urea capacity in countries within the region, including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. This is aimed at the export market. A significant share of globally traded nitrogen fertilizer – and the liquefied natural gas (LNG) that powers fertilizer plants elsewhere – must therefore travel through the Strait of Hormuz. A closure of the strait would threaten not only oil and gas exports but also the physical flow of nitrogen-based fertilizers and what is needed to make them.

The immediate effect would be delays to shipments of ammonia, urea and LNG. They could be stopped completely or become prohibitively expensive through higher freight and insurance costs. But the deeper impact would unfold in the months ahead at farms around the world.

In the northern hemisphere, fertilizer purchases accelerate before planting seasons. A delay of weeks can be disruptive; a disruption of months can make a huge difference. If shipments fail to arrive on time, farmers face difficult choices such as how to pay sharply higher prices, reduce application rates, or alter crop mixes. Because of how crops respond, even modest reductions in nitrogen use can produce disproportionately large declines in yield. That could translate into millions of tonnes of lost crops. The consequences would ripple through global supply chains into feed markets, livestock production, biofuels and ultimately retail food prices.

Do countries not have their own supplies?

Some countries have supplies of fertilizers, but self-sufficiency is rarer than it appears. India, for instance, relies heavily on LNG imports from the Persian Gulf to run its domestic urea plants. Brazil depends substantially on imported nitrogeon and phosphate fertilizers to sustain soybean and maize production.

Even the United States, one of the world’s largest fertilizer producers, imports meaningful volumes of ammonia and urea to help meet regional demand and reduce prices. In sub-Saharan Africa, use of fertilizer is already low. A further rise in prices is likely to reduce use even more, cutting yields and increasing food insecurity.

The system’s fragility extends beyond nitrogen. Sulphur – as an essential nutrient for plant growth – is largely a byproduct of oil and gas processing. If energy shipments through Hormuz are disrupted, sulphur output falls alongside fuel exports. So, the shock would not only reduce fertilizer shipments but also restrict ways to produce them elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the production of synthetic nitrogen tightly coupled to energy markets because it is manufactured continuously from natural gas. A disruption in gas supply or ammonia trade immediately constrains global nitrogen availability. Estimates suggest that without synthetic nitrogen, the world could feed only a fraction of its current population. The Strait of Hormuz therefore sits at the intersection of energy and food security.

Changing where fertilizer is produced cannot happen overnight. Financing and constructing new ammonia plants takes years. A double-digit contraction in exports from a key region cannot be swiftly offset. In the interim, prices would rise, trade flows would re-route and planting decisions would be made under uncertainty. Food price inflation, historically correlated with social unrest, could intensify.

Central banks, focused primarily on fuel-driven inflation, could underestimate the contribution of fertilizer scarcity to prices overall. Crucially, fertilizer shocks do not register with the same immediacy as oil shocks. Petrol prices change overnight. Crop yields reveal themselves months later. Yet the latter may prove more destabilising.

Controls and closure of this narrow maritime chokepoint would reshape the cost-of-living well beyond the Persian Gulf.

If the 20th century taught policymakers to fear oil embargoes, the 21st should teach them to fear a fertilizer shock. Energy markets can absorb shocks through reserves and substitution. But the global food system has far thinner buffers. A prolonged disruption at Hormuz would not simply reprice crude; it would test the resilience of the industrial nitrogen cycle on which modern civilisation depends.

Oil powers cars. Nitrogen powers crops. If the Strait of Hormuz closes, the most consequential price may not be Brent crude but the cost of feeding the world.

—Nima Shokri is a professor in applied engineering at United Nations University. Salome M. S. Shokri-Kuehni is a lecturer in environmental engineering at United Nations University and Technical University of Hamburg.

The post OPINION: How the Iran war could create a ‘fertilizer shock’ – an often ignored global risk to food prices and farming appeared first on Country Guide.

The visit signals a deliberate shift from crisis management to economic statecraft.

In Mumbai, Carney announced that Canada aims to conclude a Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with India by the end of this year, with the goal of doubling two-way trade by 2030. The message was pragmatic: the two countries may not always agree, but engagement must continue.

From rupture to reset

Canada-India relations deteriorated sharply in September 2023, leading to diplomatic expulsions, reduced staffing and suspended trade negotiations. For much of the past two years, the relationship was defined by security tensions and mutual distrust.

The first signs of stabilization came at the 2025 G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alta., when Carney’s invitation to Prime Minister Narendra Modi signalled a diplomatic breakthrough. High commissioners were reinstated and ministerial channels reopened. Carney’s India visit suggests the reset is moving from symbolism to implementation.

The logic is clear. Canada’s heavy trade dependence on the United States has become riskier amid tariff threats and political volatility. Diversification is no longer aspirational; it’s strategic.

India, as one of the world’s fastest growing major economies and an increasingly central figure in global supply chains, offers scale and long-term opportunity.

Energy as the anchor

Energy emerged as the central pillar of Carney’s two-day visit. Canada and India have relaunched the Ministerial Energy Dialogue and are advancing discussions on uranium supply, conventional energy trade and clean energy co-operation.

India’s energy demand continues to rise as economic growth accelerates. It remains heavily import-dependent on crude oil and natural gas while also seeking to expand low-carbon baseload power. Canada, meanwhile, is looking to reduce its overwhelming reliance on the U.S. market.

With expanded export capacity through the Trans Mountain pipeline and growing LNG infrastructure, Canada is better positioned to reach Indo-Pacific markets than at any point in recent decades.

While Canada will not displace other suppliers, it can become part of India’s diversification portfolio. Long-term uranium agreements, in particular, would embed trust through decades of commercial interdependence. Nuclear co-operation offers durability that few other sectors can match.

Critical minerals, structural alignment

Beyond fuels, critical minerals represent a deeper strategic opportunity. Canada’s Critical Minerals Strategy aligns closely with India’s National Critical Minerals Mission in terms of lithium, nickel, cobalt, rare earth elements and downstream supply chains.

For Canada, the goal is not simply exporting raw resources, but building integrated value chains through processing partnerships, recycling and technology collaboration. For India, secure access to minerals is essential for electric vehicles, semiconductors, defence industrial supply chains and clean energy technologies, particularly as it seeks to reduce dependence on China-dominated processing networks.

Progress in critical minerals would move the relationship beyond symbolic diplomacy toward structural alignment.

Although CEPA negotiations have stalled in the past, both countries now face stronger incentives to revive them amid global trade turbulence and diversification pressures.

Progress on energy and minerals can help build domestic support for stability while wider trade talks continue.

Innovation, security

Carney’s visit also emphasized people-to-people and innovation ties. Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand launched a new Canada–India Talent and Innovation Strategy, including 13 new university partnerships spanning artificial intelligence, hydrogen research, digital agriculture and health sciences.

Education has long anchored Canada–India relations. Embedding research collaboration and talent mobility strengthens long term institutional linkages that outlast political cycles. Artificial intelligence co-operation, in particular, aligns Canada’s strengths in responsible AI governance with India’s scale in digital infrastructure and AI deployment.

Despite economic progress, however, security concerns between India and Canada remain unresolved. The diplomatic fallout of 2023 continues to affect trust.

During the visit, Anand faced repeated questions about foreign interference and transnational repression. She emphasized that public safety concerns must be addressed through direct engagement rather than disengagement.

Recent reports of ongoing threats and warnings to Sikh activists in Canada show that underlying tensions persist, even as both governments seek to prevent them from defining the entire relationship.

Ottawa’s tone appears more measured, but the conflicting narratives between the two countries remains evident.

The road ahead

Carney’s challenge is now therefore twofold: advance economic co-operation while preventing unresolved security disputes from derailing the broader reset of the Canada-India relationship.

Improved ties with India also align with Carney’s broader foreign policy vision, articulated in Davos, that middle powers must co-operate more closely in response to fractures in the global order.

India’s inclusion in a broader Indo-Pacific tour alongside Australia and Japan underscores that this engagement is part of a wider strategic recalibration.

Stabilizing relations with India is therefore not simply a bilateral exercise. It’s about positioning Canada more credibly in the Indo-Pacific region and strengthening co-ordination among democratic middle powers navigating geopolitical uncertainty.

The significance of Carney’s visit lies less in rhetoric and more in trajectory. By setting a target for a trade agreement, advancing energy and uranium co-operation, deepening critical minerals alignment and expanding academic partnerships, Ottawa is attempting to anchor the relationship in long-term interdependence.

The reset is not complete. Security tensions still cast a shadow. But the visit suggests that both governments are willing to compartmentalize disputes and focus on areas of shared economic and strategic interest.

—Saira Bano is an assistant professor of political science at Thompson Rivers University.

The post OPINION: Mark Carney’s visit to India hits the reset button on the Canada–India relationship appeared first on Country Guide.

In early 2025, Trump invoked the act to impose tariffs on Canada, along with Mexico and China, claiming the countries failed to stop illicit drug trafficking into the United States.

WHY IT MATTERS: Following a U.S. Supreme Court decision striking down some of Donald Trump’s tariffs, the U.S. President swiftly enacted new, 15 per cent global tariffs. While agricultural goods are largely exempt under CUSMA, on-again, off-again tariffs have created a lot of economic uncertainty.

The ruling is the latest episode in a political dust-up between Canada and its neighbour to the south which recently involved the Gordie Howe International Bridge linking Ontario and Michigan.

More than steel or stone, the bridge is a symbol of a shared destiny that both respects and transcends differences. Despite their historical, institutional and political differences, Canada and the United States have bonded economically as neighbours, generating shared prosperity over the past two centuries.

In 2023, I wrote a book chapter Canada and the United States: A Symbiotic Relationship or Complex Entanglement? In that chapter, I posed a question: What if the United States becomes more aggressive and even less open to working co-operatively with Canada? To answer that question, Canada can draw lessons from its centuries-long coexistence with an often-erratic neighbour to successfully navigate the economic volatility of the present era.

While the recent Supreme Court ruling presents a setback for Trump, it is unlikely to stop him from using U.S. economic and military might as leverage against Canada and other countries. Trump swiftly signed a new executive order imposing 10 per cent global tariffs under different regulations — which were then bumped up to 15 per cent.

As Canada navigates this belligerent U.S. government, a lingering question is whether this history of interwoven reciprocity is deteriorating into a complex entanglement of vulnerability.

Two neighbours, different worlds

In the book chapter, I describe the Canada-U.S. relationship as a complex picture of deep interdependence, marked by significant power imbalances, and the creative ways Canada has learned to adapt and prosper.

The economic and political interests of the two countries have diverged and converged in undulating waves over the past 200 years. The two economies are inextricably intertwined across a range of sectors, from natural resources and agriculture to advanced manufacturing. Around 70 per cent of Canadian exports go to the U.S., and the share of Canada’s merchandise imports from south of the border was around 59 per cent in 2025.

But for Canada, the relationship is more than just economic interdependence. The U.S. has a population of about 342 million and a gross domestic product about 10 times larger than Canada’s. That sets the stage for an asymmetrical relationship whose threads are woven into the fabric of trade and geopolitics.

For Canada, this can sometimes feel like vulnerability. And that vulnerability is increasingly being exploited by the U.S., creating a general feeling of existential crisis and entrapment.

Nevertheless, Canada can draw from its centuries-long experience to navigate the current headwinds. While the smaller of the two neighbours, it is not entirely dependent on the U.S. for influencing global events or harnessing international opportunities.

Canada has been, and still is, an influential power on the international stage. As a G7 nation, Canada is one of the key pillars in the scaffolding of the global economy. This global standing and international influence give it some room to maneuver.

Navigating an existential crossroads

First, in the international arena, Canada must diversify economically and geopolitically to build strategic resilience. Prime Minister Mark Carney is already moving on this front by agreeing to ease mutual tariffs with China. With negotiations to renew the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) slated for this year, a diversified trading economy will give Canada much greater leverage to navigate the vulnerabilities of asymmetry.

Second, Canada should draw from its record of championing a rules-based order. In recent years, the country has had to skillfully navigate the crossroads of projecting and defending its global and liberal-democratic values during periods of U.S. flirtations with populism, isolationism and anti-international rhetoric. As a middle power, it derives its strength from the rule of law and by presenting a united front with like-minded nations. A wider set of partners means more buffers against trade policy whiplashes and geopolitical shocks from the U.S.

Third, domestically, loosening inter-provincial trade flows, updating anachronistic regulatory frameworks and pursuing digital data sovereignty strategies should be high priorities to fire the full engine of the economy.

Similarly, as I’ve previously argued, Canada should use its comparative advantages in natural resources to create a strong, well-connected critical minerals supply chain. This would give it significant strategic leverage in the global economy as the world shifts to electrification and renewable energy.

Over the past two centuries, Canada has mastered the complex dance of asymmetry. However, the current crisis takes on an existential proportion that will require new agility, courage and decisiveness. It is an inflection point that will mark a consequential shift for the next generation.

Canada’s nimbleness and agility in navigating this political moment could be an model for other countries that must manoeuvre a world where the old rules no longer apply. It can serve as an example for small and middle powers who must navigate a world where great powers are increasingly belligerent.

—Charles Conteh is professor of public policy and administration at Brock University

The post OPINION: Three ways Canada can navigate an increasingly erratic and belligerent United States appeared first on Country Guide.

While wetlands sequester carbon, they also naturally release greenhouse gases (GHG) into the atmosphere. That means the impact of wetland drainage on net GHG emissions was previously difficult to determine.

Our new study, however, has found that widespread wetland drainage on Prairie farmland releases 2.1 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂-eq) per year. That’s equal to more than five per cent of Prairie agricultural emissions from the industry as a whole. CO₂-eq is a metric used to to compare emissions from different greenhouse gases by converting amounts of those gases to the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide.

Our research team included Darrin Qualman from the National Farmers Union, Sydney Jensen, a then-graduate student at the University of Regina, as well as Murray Hidlebaugh and Scott Beaton, independent farmers in the Canadian Prairies.

Some tout wetland drainage as providing numerous benefits to agriculture. In addition to increasing arable land area, proponents argue that “proper drainage management … reduces the carbon footprint by cutting down equipment operation time, fuel and emissions, reduces the impacts of extreme weather events, and decreases overland flooding and nutrient washouts.”

This assertion of the environmental benefits associated with wetland drainage is not supported by science. Our work highlights a large increase in the carbon footprint associated with wetland drainage rather than a reduction, while other work documents impacts on streamflows and nutrient export, and the loss of ducks and other birds.

The impacts of draining wetlands

To quantify the net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with wetland drainage, our approach was to quantify GHG sources when wetlands are intact, and compare them with sources after drainage takes place to understand the net effect of wetland removal on emissions. The annual rate of wetland loss from existing data (10,820 hectares per year) was used to quantify associated carbon emissions for the region.

Intact wetlands emit GHGs such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, so their removal eliminates these natural emissions from the landscape. The presence of wetlands in fields can also require repeated machinery passes and lead to double fertilization around wetland margins, both of which contribute to GHG emissions.

When wetlands are drained, carbon-rich sediments are exposed to the air, allowing rapid decomposition and the release of carbon dioxide. Drainage also expands cropland area, leading to additional GHG emissions from farming activities on the newly cultivated land. It often requires the removal of rings of willow trees surrounding wetlands, with the resulting debris typically burned or composted, producing further emissions.

Our results show that the amount of carbon dioxide released from exposed soil from drained wetlands far exceeded any other source. This was much larger than emissions when wetlands were intact, including natural wetland emissions and emissions from multiple passes with machinery. Additional emissions from farming the former wetland and the removal of vegetation also made a small contribution to the overall balance.

Overall, we estimate that wetland drainage contributes to an annual increase in emissions of at least 2.1 million tonnes CO₂-eq (recognizing that stored carbon will be released over a multi-year period). It is worth noting that this includes natural emissions from intact wetlands, but emissions that are not human-caused are not typically targeted in an effort to achieve GHG reductions.

For example, reducing methane emissions from livestock is a strategy to reduce agricultural GHG emissions, but emissions from wild animals are not considered or incorporated in the same way. Our estimate swells to 3.4 million tonnes of CO₂-eq per year when we exclude natural wetland GHG emissions; this represents an increase of approximately eight per cent above currently quantified GHG emissions from the agricultural industry in the Prairie provinces.

Canada’s GHG Inventory

Canada uses a National Inventory Report to quantify GHG emissions from different jurisdictions and industries, but emissions associated with wetland drainage are not currently included. Emissions of 3.4 million tonnes of CO₂-eq from a single year of wetland drainage are substantial and exceed several emission sources currently described in the report.

For example, emissions from wetland destruction are greater than agricultural emissions from gasoline combustion in trucks or from poultry and swine manure in the Prairie provinces. Including emissions from wetland drainage in the National Inventory Report would provide a more accurate accounting of total agricultural emissions and better position the country to meet its climate commitments.

Prairie farmers play a key stewardship role in this landscape — preserving wetlands on their land provides a public good. Retaining wetlands would create many additional benefits: maintaining wildlife habitats, groundwater recharge, nutrient retention, as well as drought and flood mitigation. These wetland services help address global and regional crises related to biodiversity loss, climate change, lake eutrophication and flooding.

Research shows there is public willingness to pay to restore wetlands in the Prairie provinces. There is additionally a need to reduce conflict and increase collaboration in conversations on agricultural water management in the Canadian Prairies and develop policies that incentivize and enable landowners to consider the environmental benefits of wetlands in their decision making. By better understanding the costs of GHG emissions resulting from wetland drainage, we can better preserve wetlands in the Canadian Prairies.

—Kerri Finlay is a professor in the University of Regina’s biology department, Colin Whitfiled is an associate professor in the University of Saskatchewan’s School of Environment and Sustainability and Lauren Bortolotti is an adjust professor in the University of Saskatchewan’s School of Environment and Sustainability.

The post OPINION: Draining wetlands produces substantial emissions in the Canadian Prairies appeared first on Country Guide.

Glyphosate is widely used in forestry, agriculture and land-use management. Commercially sold under brands such as Roundup, it’s the most widely used herbicide in Canada.

In the journal’s retraction notice, the (co)editor-in-chief wrote: “Concerns were raised regarding the authorship of this paper, validity of the research findings in the context of misrepresentation of the contributions by the authors and the study sponsor and potential conflicts of interest of the authors.”

These potential conflicts raise questions about the study’s authorship and results, and renew concerns about the safety of glyphosate. According to Health Canada, consuming foods treated with glyphosate does “not result in any human health concern to any segment of the population.” This aligns with findings from other governments, including the United States, New Zealand and Australia.

Scientific research is an essential part of protecting the health and well-being of people and the planet, but it only tells part of the story. And despite some conclusions that glyphosate poses no risk, there have long been concerns regarding its impacts on the environment and human health, particularly from Indigenous communities.

Our ongoing research, in partnership with the Animbiigoo Zaagi’igan Anishinaabek (AZA) First Nation in northwestern Ontario, about the impact of glyphosate being sprayed on their traditional territory demonstrates that policymakers and researchers need to learn from the experiences of people living and working on the land.

Concerns over glyphosate

Our research focuses on glyphosate’s impacts on AZA’s relationships with the land along with the forestry companies and provincial government that use and regulate the herbicide on their territory. Through our work with 14 First Nations that are part of the Understanding Our Food Systems project, several communities expressed great concern about environmental contaminants on their territories.

Members of the AZA have been particularly distressed about the impacts of glyphosate on their traditional food systems, the land and watershed, and the community’s health for several years. People who live and work on the land have noticed many changes and called for research and action to address these concerns.

In 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” based on “limited” evidence it causes cancer in people and “sufficient” evidence it causes cancer in animals.

This has been of particular concern for many Indigenous communities in terms of the impact of glyphosate being sprayed on the berries, animals, medicines and fish that make up their traditional food systems.

While several health-related issues have been connected to glyphosate use, such as destruction of cells, inflammation that can damage healthy tissue and weakening of the immune system’s ability to defend the body against infections and disease, there is no clear consensus on what level is considered safe.

Working closely with AZA, our team of researchers from Lakehead University and the Thunder Bay District Health Unit conducted a series of sharing circles and interviews with Elders, Knowledge Keepers, hunters, gatherers and youth to learn from their observations and experiences.

The ultimate goal of our ongoing research is to better understand the community’s experiences and perspectives of glyphosate to ensure they retain access to traditionally hunted, harvested and grown foods and to protect the environments they depend on.

Listening to Indigenous people

AZA members pointed to ways that traditional knowledge could be used to better understand the impacts of environmental contamination. Those who participated in the conversations shared experiences of finding fewer animals and plants in areas sprayed with glyphosate, making access to traditional foods difficult.

Many participants said animals were more diseased and that harvested and hunted foods did not taste, smell or look the same as they did previously. Disruptions to the cycles of the land and the loss of species impact the community’s food security as well as its self-determination and ability to transfer knowledge to future generations.

Western science tends to dominate policymaking and regulation. However, Indigenous knowledge has a lot to contribute to research and decision-making. Two-eyed seeing, described by Mi’kmaw Elder Albert Marshall, is a way to integrate Indigenous and western ways of knowing, foster deeper understanding and create more holistic, balanced approaches for the benefit of all.

This demands that policymakers take seriously the concerns voiced by Indigenous people around environmental contamination. It also requires more transparent communication, accessible information and testing of waterways, animals and the land.

Listening to Indigenous people and learning from their observations and experiences is essential to protect the lands and waters where they hunt, harvest, and grow foods and medicines, and to ensure the health and well-being of all human and non-human kin.

— Charles Z. Levkoe is Canada research chair in equitable and sustainable food systems at Lakehead University. Dorothy Rody is from the Animbigoo Zaagi’igan Anishnaabek First Nation, Kim McGibbon is a public health nutritionist at the Thunder Bay District Health Unit and Liz Lovell is a former master’s student in health sciences at Lakehead University.

The post OPINION: Glyphosate — What Indigenous communities have suspected for years about the dangers of the herbicide appeared first on Country Guide.

A new study has found that this belief is no myth. Its results show that horses can detect chemical signals linked to human emotions, and that these signals can influence their behaviour and physiology.

Previous research has pointed to a form of emotional contagion between humans and horses. This is a phenomenon in which the emotional state of one person or animal influences the emotional state of another. But this is the first study to find evidence horses can detect human fear using their sense of smell.

Horses rely heavily on their sense of smell to understand the world around them. Their olfactory system is far more sensitive than ours, allowing them to detect subtle chemical differences in the environment.

There is scientific evidence that horses can select the most nutritious food by smelling it. A 2016 found that horses select foods based on nutrient content (such as protein), not just flavour, and that the way their body responds after eating influences future choices they make about food.

So how can horses smell our fear? Well, human emotions come with physiological changes. When people experience fear or stress, their body, face and voice changes. Their body also releases hormones such as adrenaline and cortisol, heart rate increases, and their sweat composition changes. These changes alter the chemical profile of a person’s body odour, which can carry information about their emotional state.

The scent of fear

The new study found evidence horses not only detect but also respond to human emotional odours. Horses in the study were exposed to human body odours collected via cotton pads wiped under the armpits of people.

These research participants watched either an excerpt from the 2012 horror movie Sinister (to induce fear) or clips, like the Singing in the Rain’s dance scene (to induce joy). The researchers also collected control odours with no emotional association.

The horses showed distinct behavioural and physiological changes when exposed to fear-related odours through the cotton pads, which were secured by a nylon mask on the horses’ noses. They were more alert, more reactive to sudden events and less inclined to approach humans.

And they showed increases in maximum heart rate, which indicates stress, during the exposure to the fear smell from sweat. Crucially, these responses happened without any visual or vocal cues from humans displaying fear.

This finding shows that smell alone can influence a horse’s emotional state. Horses were not reacting to tense body language, facial expressions or nervous movements – they were responding to chemical signals carried in human scent.

Previous research has shown horses seem to be sensitive to humans’ emotional states. In a May 2025 study, horses were shown videos of humans expressing fear, joy or neutral emotions in their facial expressions and voice.

Researchers measured the horses’ heart rate, behaviour and facial expressions while they watched the videos. The horses showed increased heart rates when exposed to fearful or joyful human expressions compared with neutral ones, which indicates heightened emotional arousal.

Fearful expressions depicted in the videos were associated with alert postures in the horses, like holding their head high and pointing their ears back and stress-related facial movements, like wide eyes. Joyful expressions depicted in the videos were linked to patterns associated with positive emotional states, like relaxed nostrils and ears.

Together, these findings are consistent with emotional contagion. Emotional contagion has been documented between humans and dogs, for instance, and these results suggest horses may also be affected by human emotions.

What this does – and doesn’t – mean

These studies do not suggest that horses understand fear in the same way humans do, or that they know why a person is afraid. Instead, the evidence shows horses are highly sensitive to the chemical, visual and vocal cues associated with emotional states.

Smell is probably just one part of a broader physiological system. Horses are adept at reading human posture, muscle tension, breathing patterns, heart rate and movement – all of which change when a person is anxious. These cues shape how a horse perceives and responds to a human.

Understanding how horses perceive human emotions has important implications for welfare, training and safety. Riders, handlers and therapists working with horses may unintentionally influence an animal’s emotional state through their own stress or calmness.

More broadly, the research challenges outdated assumptions about animal perception. Horses are not passive responders to human commands, as equine professionals and researchers thought until recently. They are sensitive social partners, finely tuned to the emotional signals we give off.

Horses evolved as social prey animals living in large herds on open grasslands, where survival depended on detecting danger quickly. Although humans began domesticating horses around 5,500 years ago, this is evolutionarily recent, meaning modern horses still retain highly sensitive sensory systems adapted for vigilance and social awareness.

So, when people say horses can smell fear, science now suggests they may be closer to the truth than we originally thought. And next time you are close to a horse, try to relax, and make the interaction more enjoyable for both of you.

—Roberta Blake is a professor of animal performance science at Anglia Ruskin University in the U.K.

The post Horses really can smell fear, new study claims, and it changes their behaviour appeared first on Country Guide.

The vote took place amid a long-running European debate over the designation of plant-based alternatives to animal protein and the associated “linguistic gymnastics”.

A previous proposal to prohibit comparisons between dairy and plant-based foods was rejected. But the EU did decide to reserve the term “dairy” for products derived from animal milk. As a result, companies must now refer to their products as “almond drink” or “plant-based slices”, for example.

In the case of meat, the labelling propositions are part of a broader set of amendments to EU agricultural and food market regulations. These are supposed to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain.

Farmers in Europe have long expressed concerns that plant-based substitutes could threaten traditional farming practices.

But what about the role of the consumer in debates over how meat and its plant-based substitutes should be labelled?

Plant-based food makers fear rebranding

Before the vote, MEPs had discussed a perceived lack of transparency for consumers. It was suggested that terms such as “veggie burger” or “tofu steak” obscure the distinction between meat and plant-based or lab-grown alternatives. These ambiguities, it was argued, could confuse or mislead consumers.

While member states must still negotiate the amendments detailing the labelling changes, the consequences could be significant. Some retailers, like supermarket chain Lidl, are working to increase sales of plant-based foods. This aligns with what the science says about sustainable diets.

After initial growth in the market for plant-based alternatives, sales have plateaued. Many producers fear they may now also face additional costs associated with rebranding and relabelling their products.

In response, a coalition of food producers and retailers have argued that avoiding familiar terms like “steak” or “burger” could actually create more confusion among consumers.

But how misled are consumers really?

Despite concerns on both sides of the debate, our research shows a different reality – one in which many consumers are much more knowledgeable than they are made out to be.

Consumers savvy to ‘greenwashing’

We studied how people reacted to a marketing campaign by Swedish chicken producer Kronfågel. The campaign implied that climate action is the consumer’s responsibility, suggesting that shoppers should switch from beef to chicken to “do something simple for the climate”.

As part of the campaign, an emissions calculation underscored this shift, even leaving the impression it could offset air travel – based on just one meal. While the campaign drew from standardized carbon footprinting, the calculation left more questions than answers.

Through analysis of comments on social media and complaints to the Swedish consumer protection agency, we studied how people reacted to the campaign – rejecting it vehemently. They took issue for a range of reasons, including the corporation’s use of climate science and debates about what constitutes sustainable food consumption and what does not.

The various sources of disagreement illustrate the polarization over food consumption and production. Many people were critical of the suggestion to “offset” flying by eating chicken, while others questioned the appropriateness of a chicken producer, with suppliers in the agricultural sector, demonizing beef production.

The company responded by saying that its intention was to “help consumers navigate” the difficulties of lowering their consumption-related carbon footprint. It also said that it took consumer criticisms about the campaign being misleading to heart and would learn from them. We know of no investigation into the campaign, but we sense a shift towards softer messaging more broadly as companies’ fears of greenwashing accusations increase.

Research conclusions

Our research shows that many consumers are well informed about their choices, actively scrutinizing food products about their health effects, climate impact and production processes. And in debating the advantages and disadvantages of meat and plant-based alternatives, we found that they would openly disagree with each other.

These discussions reveal that there are many relevant perspectives and values involved in choosing the “best” diet – and consumption choices are deeply tied to identity, emotion and culture. In light of this complexity, our research serves as a warning for businesses and other organizations, including political parties, to approach climate messaging with care and to make sure their claims are credible.

So what then to make of the labelling debate? It is of course important to safeguard consumers from harmful or deceptive marketing. However, research has illustrated how powerful people and organizations may stereotype citizens. This may be, for instance, as “responsible”, “misled” or “duped” consumers – often the purpose is to serve their own commercial or political interests.

Politicians, food producers and retailers should be cautious about claims that consumers cannot differentiate meat from plant-based alternatives. Shoppers are often much more switched on than some in the EU debate suggest.

— Friederike Döbbe is an assistant professor in business and society at the University of Bath. Emilia Cederberg is an assistant professor in the department of accounting at the Stockholm School of Economics.

The post Consumers not confused by plant protein ‘burgers’ or ‘milk’, research suggests appeared first on Country Guide.

In response, more people are growing their own food. A 2022 national survey found that just over half of respondents were growing fruits or vegetables at home, and nearly one in five started during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Municipal governments have taken note, developing food and urban agriculture strategies that promise more green space, better access to fresh food, stronger communities and sometimes climate benefits. But do they actually change conditions on the ground?

That question sits at the centre of our new study published in the Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development.

London, Ont., adopted Canada’s first stand-alone Urban Agriculture Strategy in 2017. It was a hopeful signal that food and urban agriculture finally had a place on the municipal agenda. Yet, almost eight years later, many of the strategy’s goals remain unrealized.

Based on interviews and a workshop with 56 urban growers, community organizations and city staff in London, we found how a promising strategy can stall without clear leadership, resources and follow-through.

Why urban agriculture matters

Urban agriculture encompasses everything from backyard and balcony gardens to community gardens, small commercial operations, rooftop farms and community projects that process and distribute food.

Research links these activities to better mental health, stronger social connections and improved access to fresh food, especially for low-income communities, immigrants and seniors.

In London, demand for local food and garden space surged during the pandemic. The London Food Bank reported a 92 per cent increase in demand for food donations from 2021 to 2023. Community gardens across the city have long waiting lists. There is no shortage of interest or need for local food; the question is whether city policies support it.

What the strategy changed — and what it didn’t

We found that the city’s urban agriculture strategy helped advance urban agriculture in meaningful ways. Research participants told us it helped “put food on the agenda” at city hall, supporting updates to zoning and bylaws that make it easier to grow food in the city.

But when we asked urban growers and community organizations how much the strategy shaped their day-to-day work, the picture became more complicated. Roughly one-third of the people we spoke with had never heard of the strategy at all, despite actively participating in urban agriculture.

Others knew it existed but were unsure which actions had actually been implemented. Several described it as a “good starting point” that had not been backed by the staffing or funding needed for full implementation.

The strategy came with no dedicated position or budget. Responsibility was scattered across city departments, with no one tracking progress. Supportive staff helped where they could, but limited capacity meant they relied on the community to drive change.

Common challenges mentioned by urban growers and community organizations were unclear zoning and permitting processes, a lack of available land for long-term gardening and minimal financial support, leading to over-reliance on volunteers. The strategy helped normalize urban agriculture in London and opened some doors, but didn’t transform the system.

One of the strongest themes in our research was the strain on community capacity. Like many cities, London’s urban agriculture is powered by volunteers, small non-profit organizations and social enterprises. These groups are deeply committed but face rising demand, complex social needs and unstable funding. Asking them to carry a municipal strategy without matching support is unrealistic.

This echoes findings from other cities. Reviews of urban agriculture policies in Canada and the United States show that local enthusiasm often runs ahead of institutional support.

Strategies tend to celebrate urban agriculture’s potential but pay less attention to equitable land access, labour conditions and the economic realities of growing food in cities.

How cities can help urban agriculture

If other cities want to avoid London’s growing pains, our research points to several concrete steps they can take:

• Assign clear responsibility. Task a specific department, name a lead staff person and allocate ongoing funding. Without this, actions are likely to be delayed, forgotten or handled piecemeal.
• Simplify the rules and centralize information. Create accessible one-stop web pages and guidance documents that spell out what’s allowed, what permits are needed, how to access land and who to contact.
• Secure space for growing. Map under-utilized land, integrate food production into parks and use long-term leases or land trusts to provide more security for community-led projects.
• Treat community partners as co-planners. Develop strategies alongside practitioners, including those from under-represented and marginalized communities. Bring them into the process early and support their full participation, rather than seeking their feedback after decisions are set.

Urban agriculture won’t fix food insecurity — the biggest determinants remain income, housing, social supports and broader food-system policy. But our findings from London indicate that it can still deliver public value.

By committing to implementation and treating food growing as a key piece of urban infrastructure, municipalities can build healthier, better connected and more sustainable cities.

—Richard Bloomfield is an assistant professor in management and organizational studies at Huron University College at Western University. Kassie Miedema is a researcher in management and organizational studies at Huron University College at Western University. Rebecca Ellis is a sessional instructor in geography, geology and land stewardship at Algoma University.

The post Growing pains: An Ontario city’s urban agriculture efforts show good policy requires real capacity appeared first on Country Guide.