> Basically, as others have said, there is an evolutionary reason plants do not naturally grow this big (they'd kill themselves off in a few generations).
We're very far away from the wild versions of crops at this point. Evolutionary arguments here seem pretty odd to me, most of these crops have had huge selective pressure towards whatever people value, not necessarily what is good for them in isolation, without the pressure from people most crop yields would drop dramatically. They are much higher than what is optimal without selective pressure from people.
Agree. It's a complex topic, I think we should move away from "nature knows best" type of arguments. I would add, these selective pressures are not just from mankind, but potentialy from any other living thing. The "natural state" is more random than natural.
Yet monocultures of plants are still able to deplete soil. With the sharp reduction coming in fossil fuels (which help make fertilizer), we may be seeing the end of crops that can only grow on life support in the next few decades.
We're very far away from the wild versions of crops at this point. Evolutionary arguments here seem pretty odd to me, most of these crops have had huge selective pressure towards whatever people value, not necessarily what is good for them in isolation, without the pressure from people most crop yields would drop dramatically. They are much higher than what is optimal without selective pressure from people.