Reading — 2026 May–Aug Recall Set 13

Slow Food began when Carlo Petrini, an Italian journalist, was dismayed by the opening of a fast food restaurant on the famous Piazza di Spagna in Rome. He decided it was time to celebrate the fast-disappearing virtues of the slow production, preparation and eating of food. What he had in mind when he began the Slow Food organization were local foods which were prepared in their traditional manner and eaten at leisurely meals with family and friends. Slow Food is the antithesis of everything fast food stands for, and it is now a thriving international organization with members in 45 countries, a successful publishing operation and a biannual trade show. In addition, Slow Food has launched a project called the ‘Ark of Taste’ and a concept called ‘virtuous globalization’. The Ark of Taste is the catalog of endangered food plant and animal species that Slow Food has resolved to protect against the rising global tide of fast food. Some examples of the biodiversity promoted by the Ark of Taste include Iroquois white corn and the Narragansett turkey, both of which are old, or heritage, foods in North America. Biodiversity is a term commonly associated with discussions of threats to wild species, but according to Slow Food the biodiversity of the domesticated species people have depended on for centuries is no less important. For example, when the latest patented hybrid variety of plant proves unable to withstand fungal or bacterial disease, plant breeders will need the disease-resistant genes which can be obtained from heritage plant varieties. If Iroquois white corn had fallen out of production, as it very nearly did two decades ago due to the commercial launch of a new hybrid corn, irreplaceable and possibly crucial sets of corn genes would have been lost forever. For some time, plant-saver groups have been preserving heritage plant varieties, but Slow Food takes that project a step further. The movement understands that all the food and plant species in its Ark of Taste carry not only information about genetic traits but they also embody a set of social practices, and in some cases even a way of life of previous generations. Slow Food teaches that when a variety of food or breed of animal disappears, something greater also disappears: a specific, irreplaceable mode of life that a particular people have devised for living in a particular part of the Earth. An example of this is the Iroquois white corn. By working to find new markets for this ancient variety of corn, Slow Food is ensuring a source of income for the Native Americans who grow, roast, and grind this corn and, at the same time, helping to preserve the specific cookery and religious uses that the corn has been selected to support over hundreds of years. Slow Food has moved away from the traditional locations for preserving rare animal and plant species. For example, instead of zoos for rare animals and botanic gardens for rare plants, Slow Food maintains that its plants and animals are best preserved on the dishes and plates of discerning customers. To this end, Slow Food has introduced the concept of virtuous globalization, which recognizes that the best way to ensure a safe future for distinctive local products and practices is to find a global market for them. In this way, local producers will be able to continue producing the food which for many years has been a defining factor of their cultural identity. The characteristics of the virtuous globalization of Slow Foods show how different the concept is from the globalization of fast foods. Whereas global fast food companies aim to sell food that has an unchanging taste wherever in the world it is eaten, the taste of a recognized Slow Food is unique to that food. Another aspect is the quantities sold of these two types of food. In the case of fast food, these are enormous, but the quantities of Slow Food products which are available for selling are limited, due to the rarity of the plants or animals. The customers of virtuous globalization Slow Foods are affluent people who value novelty and are undeterred by the costs, which are high when compared to fast food. Some years ago, a network of farmers in the USA volunteered to take part in a national Slow Food project. The project was for the farmers to raise a total of 5,000 turkeys from eggs which had been selected from four varieties of endangered turkey. The farmers had to begin by hatching the eggs they had been supplied with, then raising the young turkeys to adults. They were promised a guaranteed price per pound for the adult turkeys. The object of the enterprise was to raise heritage turkeys for the North American holiday of Thanksgiving. Although chefs in some restaurants where the turkeys were on the menu complained that the Slow Food turkeys were smaller than industrially produced turkeys, the distinctive flavors were very well received by consumers. By the following year, the world population of these turkeys had nearly doubled. It may seem strange that taking pleasure in eating could be a strategy for preserving biodiversity because pleasure is not normally associated with environmentalism. However, pleasure is part of what Slow Food aims to bring back, by demonstrating that, at least when it comes to the politics of food, the best choice is often the one that provides the most enjoyment.

Rain-forest trees growing anew on Central American farmland are helping scientists find ways for monkey and agriculture to benefit one another. A Hacienda La Pacifica, a remote working cattle ranch in Guanacaste Province of northern Costa Rica, has for decades been home to a community of mantled howler monkeys. Other native primates—white-faced capuchin monkeys and spider monkeys—were once common in this area too, but vanished after the Pan-American Highway was built nearby in the 1950s and most of the surrounding land was cleared for cattle-raising. At Hacienda La Pacifica, however, an enlightened ranch owner chose to leave some strips of native trees growing. He used these as windbreaks to protect both cattle and their food crops from dry-season winds. In the process, the farmer unwittingly founded a unique laboratory for the study of monkeys. B Ken Glander, a primatologist from Duke University in the USA, is studying La Pacifica’s monkeys in an effort to understand the relationship between howlers and regenerating forests at the edges of grazing lands. Studying such disturbed woodlands is increasingly important because throughout much of the New World Tropics, these are the only forests left. In the 18th century, tropical dry forests once covered most of Central America, but by the 1980s less than two percent remained undisturbed, and less than one percent was protected. C Howlers persist at La Pacifica, Glander explains, because they are leaf-eaters. They eat fruit when it is available but, unlike capuchin and spider monkeys, do not depend on large areas of fruiting trees. Glander is particularly interested in howlers’ ability to thrive on leaves loaded with toxins—poisonous substances designed to protect the plants. For leaf-eaters, long-term exposure to a specific plant toxin can increase their ability to neutralise the poisonous substances and absorb the leaf nutrients. Watching generations of howlers at La Pacifica has shown Glander that the monkeys keep their systems primed by sampling a variety of plants and then focusing on a small number of the most nutritious food items. The leaves that grow in regenerating forests, like those at La Pacifica, are actually more howler-friendly than those produced by the centuries-old trees that survive farther south. In younger forests, trees put most of their limited energy into growing wood, leaves and fruit, so they produce much lower levels of toxin than do well-established, old-growth trees. D The value of maturing forests to primates is also a subject of study at Santa Rosa National Park, about 35 miles northwest of La Pacifica. Large areas of Santa Rosa’s forests had at one time been burnt to make space for cattle ranching and coffee farming, thereby devastating local monkey habitat. But in 1971 the government protected the area by designating it a national park, and species of indigenous trees which had been absent for decades began to invade the abandoned pastures. Capuchins were the first to begin using the reborn forests, followed by howlers. Eventually, even spider monkeys, fruit-eaters that need large areas of continuous forest, returned. In the first 28 years following protection of the area, the capuchin population doubled, while the number of howlers increased seven-fold. E Some of the same traits that allow howlers to survive at La Pacifica also explain their population boom in Santa Rosa. Howler reproduction is faster than that of other native monkey species. They give birth for the first time at about 3.5 years of age, compared with seven years for capuchins, and eight or more for spider monkeys. Also, while a female spider monkey will have a baby about once every four years, well-fed howlers can produce an infant every two years. Another factor is diet. Howlers are very adaptable feeders and need only a comparatively small home range. Spider monkeys, on the other hand, need to occupy a huge home range. Also crucial is the fact that the leaves howlers eat hold plenty of water, so the monkeys can survive away from open streams and water-holes. This ability gives them a real advantage over capuchin and spider monkeys, which have suffered during the long, ongoing drought in the area. F Alejandro Estrada, an ecologist at Estación de Biología Los Tuxtlas in Veracruz, Mexico, has been studying the ecology of a group of howler monkeys that thrive in a habitat totally altered by humans: a cacao plantation in Tabasco State, Mexico. Cacao plants need shade to grow, so 40 years ago the owners of Cholula Cacao Farm planted figs, monkey-pod and other tall trees to form a protective canopy over their crop. The howlers moved in about 25 years ago after nearby forests were cut. This strange habitat seems to support about as many monkeys as would a same-sized patch of wild forest. The howlers eat the leaves and fruit of the shade trees, leaving the valuable cacao pods alone. G Estrada believes the monkeys bring under-appreciated benefits to such plantations, dispersing the seeds of fruits such as fig and other shade trees, and fertilising the soil. Spider monkeys also forage for fruit here, though they need nearby areas of forest to survive in the long term. He hopes that farmers will begin to see the advantages of associating with wild monkeys, which could include potential ecotourism projects. ‘Conservation is usually viewed as a conflict between farming practices and the need to preserve nature,’ Estrada says. ‘We’re moving away from that vision and beginning to consider ways in which commercial activities may become a tool for the conservation of primates in human-modified landscapes.’

A Why do we give people flowers? To offer condolence to those who are grieving. To celebrate. To woo. To ask for forgiveness. We all know intuitively that there is something psychologically universal about our emotional response. In the US alone, the flower industry is now worth about $5bn a year—which suggests that, at the very least, they service a compelling human need. B Recent studies at the Department of Psychology at Rutgers State University of New Jersey investigated claims that flowers are unique among living organisms in their ability to induce profound changes in our emotional state. As the first part of their research, the Rutgers team visited 150 women in their homes. Each was presented with a variety of gifts such as flowers, fruit or sweets. The women were unaware that the study was about the effect of the flowers on their emotions. They were told that it was a study about their daily moods, and that they would receive a gift in return for taking part. Following the presentation of the gift, those receiving flowers were assessed as displaying a much more positive mood than those who got other gifts, and this effect lasted for several days. After receiving flowers, they were also more willing to answer questions concerning their social circle and intimate conversations with friends and family. The results suggest that flowers influence our secondary socio-emotional behaviours, as well as having a strong effect on our immediate emotional expression. C In the second study, the psychologists observed participants being handed single flowers, or alternative gifts, in a constrained and stressful situation—inside an elevator. Contrary to predictions regarding gender differences, both men and women presented with flowers were more likely to smile, to stand closer and to initiate conversation. Several subjects who were given the alternative gift then learnt that flowers were also being handed out, and returned to the elevator and demanded a flower. The scientists used elevators for this study precisely because the most typical behaviour in sparsely occupied elevators is for people to retreat to opposite corners. The subjects who received flowers, however, closed up that space to a considerable extent—indicating that the flowers not only induced a strong positive mood, but brought a significant affiliation among people who had never previously met. D The third study involved regularly sending flowers to a selected sample of men and women. The researchers found not only a profound elevation of mood, but also reliable improvements in other measures of cognitive function, like memory. In this series of experiments, some participants produced such extraordinary emotional displays that the psychologists were totally unprepared for them. Subjects gave spontaneous hugs and kisses to the people who delivered the flowers, and sent invitations to the psychologists to come to their homes for refreshments. E Various evolutionary hypotheses attempt to explain the remarkably powerful psychological effect of flowers. One is that our aesthetic preferences for fertile locations and growing things stem from prehistory, when these clues in our environment could mean the difference between starvation and survival. We may have become hardwired to respond positively to flowers because for early man, finding them in a particular location predicted future food supplies and possibly a better place to rear children. Yet the flaw in this argument is that the showy flowers which humans seem to find most visually attractive are generally found on those plants which yield no edible products. F The Rutgers psychologists' findings show that the various physical attributes of flowers combine to directly affect our emotions through multi-channel interactions. We have evolved preferences for the particular colours, textures, patterned symmetries and specific floral odours which influence our moods. Indeed, previous research has established that popular perfumes, which often have a floral 'top-note', will actually reduce depression. The origins of these inclinations may well be as the evolutionary theories suggest—the patterned symmetries of flowers can be detected easily as a recognizable signal within a wide variety of visual arrays, and a response to certain colour tones is important in finding ripe fruit against a leafy background. But, claim the Rutgers team, these preferences have long been separated from their primary evolutionary use, and become rewarding to us more generally. Thus plants with preferred colours, shapes and odours—despite having no other products—would therefore be protected and dispersed. G The Rutgers study suggests that flowers may have actually evolved to exploit their peculiar impact on humans. The team's theory proposes a plant-human co-evolution, or even domestication, based on the intense emotional rewards that flowers provide. The idea that flowering plants, with no known food or other basic survival value to man, have co-evolved with us by exploiting an emotional niche instead, is very much like the scenario presented for the evolution of dogs. Flowers may be the plant equivalent of 'companion animals': If this is true, then there is a very real sense in which, when you next give flowers, they are using you just as much as you are using them.