Team:ULaval/Human Practices
HUMAN PRACTICES
Introduction
The definition of what is good or not depends entirely on the person you are speaking to. This divergence of opinions comes from our different systems of values and judgment. Many scientists or entrepreneurs develop systems that seem revolutionary to them, because they appear to only give benefit to those who would be using them. Unfortunately, their projects often do not have a real impact on the world because they do not consult the people who face the problem they want to solve. As a team, we did not want that to happen!
The team wanted to work on something that we are passionate about: maple syrup. We are all familiar with this product since our childhood. Some members of our team even harvest maple syrup or know someone who does so and sells it. In a way, the project we chose to work will not only impact one of Canada’s biggest industries, but also many producers in need of a solution against ropy maple syrup.
ROPY MAPLE SYRUP:
THE STICKY PROBLEM
Having members who know so much about the topic, we knew about the issues this industry faces. We could have tackled a lot of problems like the biofilm in the sap, different flavor defects in maple syrup or even the contamination of the tubing, all ideas we had at one point during our journey. After doing further research and contacting multiple experts (see INTEGRATED section), we finally decided to work on ropy maple syrup. Ropy maple syrup (or ropy syrup) has a defective texture and sometimes bad taste, which leads to maple syrup producers not being paid for it when it is produced. In fact, they actually have to pay extra fees just to have this undesired product destroyed! In Quebec, ropy syrup is defined by the formation of a string at least 10 cm long1 while scooping the syrup out of its container. It is a recurrent problem for certain producers and damages expensive equipment. A survey we did even informed us that for small producers, ropy syrup could mean a whole year of lost profit. Another problem is the pollution of the environment by its wasted product and the energy wasted to make this syrup. In the province of Quebec, we are talking about 5,5 million $CAD of loss between 2008 and 2017(Lagacé et al., 2018), due to ropy syrup. Finally, there are currently no means to predict when ropy maple syrup will be produced.
Ropy maple syrup is a problem that not many people care about. By interviewing different experts, we learned that this flavor defect is being worked on but a solution has not been found yet. A reason behind that could be that ropy syrup is not a major problem for most producers as it only represents around 0,2%1 of an annual production of maple syrup. This percentage is very likely higher, because producers tend to get rid of this type of maple syrup themselves, without declaring it, due to costs of registration and destruction by the Producteurs et productrices acéricoles du Québec (PPAQ, french for Maple Producers of Quebec, a private maple syrup federation) and the lack of income from it, making it harder to track. However, it is estimated that 95% of the ropy syrup produced is said to be registered by the PPAQ (Lagacé et al., 2018), and the rest is thrown away in the environment by the producers. We can not prevent it, we can not predict it and it does not affect everyone in this industry. Still, experts informed us that the ropy maple syrup problem will be more recurrent in the future, because of the industrialisation of maple syrup and climate change. Therefore, we wanted to do something to help those who are already suffering because of it and for the ones that will in the coming years.
aSAP : THE SLICK SOLUTION
Knowing that the producers are not paid for their hard work if they produce ropy maple syrup and knowing that you cannot prevent or predict this problem, we decided that we wanted to take action. We learned that maple syrup becomes ropy when it contains dextrans, which are glucose polymers. As such, we created aSAP, or a Solution Against maple Polymers. Our project aims to diminish the viscosity of ropy maple syrup by degrading these dextran molecules with an enzymatic treatment. It really is the revalorisation of waste.
The syrup resulting from our treatment could be used as a base for different applications like in the pastry industry due to its high concentration of sugar, it could be used to feed animals or even to make alcohol. Considering all these ramifications, we asked the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food of Quebec (MAPAQ) about the legislation surrounding maple syrup. Unfortunately, maple syrup, by definition, cannot be transformed, so this value-added product will not be called maple syrup because we use enzymatic methods to treat and modify it. Nevertheless, we saw that this valuable transformed product would give some kind of profit to the producer and can have other purposes in different industries that do not need high quality sugars, in this case modified ropy syrup, for example.
Once we confirmed our project could have realistic applications, we needed to confirm if producers and consumers would accept its use. The ultimate goal of our project is to reduce economic loss for maple syrup producers to help give them a more stable income. In order to accomplish this goal while designing our project, we put the needs of maple producers first, which mostly involved an economical point of view. We surveyed 50 maple producers from different regions in Quebec to ask them about the issues they faced. They raised an environmental concern about the waste management of ropy syrup and confirmed it was a real problem for them. In fact, most producers were willing to invest in a solution to ropy maple syrup. As it turns out, the direction we took to design our project also responded to this need as it will redirect the waste (here, the valueless and polluting ropy syrup) as a means of profit. Therefore, we responded to both economical and environmental concerns with a single solution, aSAP.
Usefulness
The solution we propose could have some genuine positive consequences on the maple syrup industry.
First, it is a source of income, for the producers and the industry, from a product that had originally no value and that was discarded in the environment.
Secondly, it will make it easier to manage ropy maple syrup not only for the benefit of the environment, but also for the industry that needs to store this defective maple syrup until it is safely destroyed. Instead of using storage space for nothing and costing disposal fees, ropy maple syrup would have a useful place in the industry.
Thirdly, elevating the quality of this product can always open the door to be used in other industries which resolves its waste problem. aSAP will then help the environment by eliminating waste and preventing the energy consumption of the syrup production process for nothing.
Even though it is exciting to think about the positives, it is important to try to anticipate potential setbacks for our project. For example, the industry will have to spend money for the product to at least pay the expenses for making our enzyme. We intend to do a more elaborate plan next year to see how much the industry will have to pay and how much they will profit from our product. Furthermore, insights from a leading organization in the maple syrup industry in Quebec, the PPAQ, revealed that such a project was economically feasible as they too were investigating a way to revalorise ropy maple syrup, but did not have a solution yet. The next step will be to distribute a survey among consumers of maple products to know if they would accept products that involve our proposed treatment.
Another problem we will face in the future is the marketing of the value-added product. As said earlier, we will not be able to call the product maple syrup because of the enzymatic procedures used on it. Later on, we spoke to Jean-Michel Lavoie, a professor at the University of Sherbrooke, and he told us that if we market aSAP properly, the name should not be a problem. Next year, we intend on finding a way to sell our product to the industry and explain to them that we do not want to make this maple syrup a fraud or to modify its essence, we want to make it valuable.
Since we could not go to the laboratory this summer, it is tough to target the exact risk our project will be facing. There is a possibility that the taste could be altered to the point where even the pastry industry will not want to use it. Also, the enzymes may create metabolic reactions which could leave the maple syrup not edible. As apprentice scientists, we know that something can work theoretically and give totally other results in real life. We are aware that altering a natural product could have its bad outcomes. Therefore, we know that if we want the value-added product to stay edible, we would have to prove in the laboratory that our product is safe. There is also a risk that other industries will not want or feel the need to use aSAP. It is part of our project to think of a proper way to sell our product and to prove its qualities.
Something we really like about our project is that, at this moment, there are no other alternatives or solutions for this problem. Producers either throw the multiple barrels of ropy syrup in the environment or in their septic tanks themselves or give it to the PPAQ which stores it. Neither of these actions is actually a solution to the problem and neither is ecofriendly. Previous ideas we had, like working on buddy syrup (a specific taste defect characterized by the presence of other compounds related to the trees’ late-season metabolism), were already taken upon by other researchers and some already have a proposed profitable product. We wanted to make aSAP an alternative that was never even approached before and that it would actually be helpful. Other projects we wanted to work on had a serious lack of data which made the continuing of those projects impossible. For instance, we can not regulate the biofilm of the sap, because the knowledge on this topic is not complete enough (Marie Filteau, personal communication); we do not know exactly the role and the importance of each of the microorganisms present.
Our system is aiming for equity, because it can tackle the ropy syrup in the whole industry produced by small factories as much as the big ones. In fact, maple syrup producers from small and big factories deserve to have a product that could be mint in regards to all the effort, time and money put into the production. Also, eliminating ropy maple syrup will decrease the amount of syrup thrown away which is better for the environment. It is not because ropy syrup is a small problem that it is not a problem at all.
Regarding the development of our project, no one risks anything except for us. Ropy syrup is a defective type of maple syrup that comes with an unpleasant taste and mouthfeel, a waste, something that is undesirable and should not be produced. Our project is truly the revalorisation of a waste product, so we do not expect it to have a negative impact on anybody. When aSAP is concretely created, the benefits will go to the maple syrup industry and producers first, because aSAP will give them another source of income. However, it is important to validate with consumers that products derived from our treatment will still be acceptable. If consumers do not accept our product, all the economic benefits to maple producers would not be achieved.
Because of the alimentary aspect of our project, we will have to face standards and laws that mark out this field of agrifood production. The authorities in this area are the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAPAQ), Producteurs et productrices acéricoles du Québec (PPAQ, french for Maple Producers of Quebec, a private maple syrup federation), and the ACER Research Center. Because we take our desire to make a change in the industry very seriously, we reached out to people in each of these institutions. We learned about acceptability, laws and feasibilities or our ideas.
- Lagacé, L., Camara, M., Leclerc, S., Charron, C., & Sadiki, M. (2018). Chemical and microbial characterization of ropy maple sap and syrup. Maple Syrup Digest, 9–19.
Overview
Our human practices shaped and reshaped our project time and again in many different ways. At first, we developed project ideas as a team. Throughout our many consultations (12 and still counting to this day) with experts in food science, maple syrup research, ethics, structural biology and biochemistry we adjusted our ideas, came up with new ones, discarded others or brought back some to life later on. These conversations were always connected, as each of them inspired the subject of the following one. This selection process for our project aimed to serve and respond to a real problem faced by the maple producers first. In doing so, we gave them a voice, listened to them and changed our course of action according to their needs, as we vowed to help them and make the industry of maple syrup in Quebec better. By responding to a local problem in this industry, we believe this will also positively impact other producers outside of the province that struggle with the same problem : ropy maple syrup, a valueless, wasteful type of maple syrup.
Here is the story of how our project evolved throughout the year.
Timeline
March 11th 2020
We decided on the project we wanted to work on : maple syrup. More particularly, we wanted to use synthetic biology to control the composition of the biofilm found in the tubing system connecting the maple trees to the sugar shack. This biofilm is the cause of many flavor defects that can reduce or prevent income to the producers. From the start, we were determined to work on the revalorisation of lesser quality maple syrup. Two important kinds of maple syrup defects we identified from the beginning were: buddy syrup and ropy syrup. They are caused by completely different reasons: buddy syrup associated to the end-of-season metabolism of maple trees (N’guyen et al., 2018), and ropy syrup associated to bacterial contamination (Lagacé et al., 2018).
April 14th 2020
When we decided in which industry we wanted to develop a project, we got in touch with people that knew the most about maple syrup. We first spoke to Marie Filteau, a researcher at the Department of Food and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Université Laval. She explained the whole production process of maple syrup. She also talked about the different types of flavor defects. In fact, speaking to her and reading her PhD thesis made us realize that our initial idea of targeting the maple syrup biofilm was not a good idea, because of its complexity and the fact that not all microorganisms are bad for the flavors. After this meeting, we still had two major ideas to work with : reduce the production of buddy syrup (the most common flavor defect) or revalorize ropy syrup (a less common flavor defect, but with worst consequences). One flavor defect has a monetary value to this day while the other is a complete economical loss for the producers, respectively.
The same day, Jean-François Sénéchal, a teacher in the Department of Philosophy, provided us meaningful advice on the ethical aspect of a scientific project and did a presentation on how we should tackle the human practices section. Since we had limited lab access due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the human practices and planning stages became a major part of our project for the 2020 competition.
After having a Zoom meeting with Marie Filteau and Jean-François Sénéchal, we decided to directly ask the maple syrup producers what their problems were. As a consensus, the team chose to use a survey as means of contact with them. For an introduction to market research, we also wanted to know what would be useful to them, so we thought of including some questions regarding their interest for a new process in maple syrup production that would reduce either production of buddy or ropy maple syrup.
A maple syrup consumer (general population) survey was also planned to get their opinion regarding the use of agents in maple syrup, their maple consumption habits, their knowledge about synthetic biology and perception of the maple industry in Quebec.
April 15th 2020
After deliberating on the two possible projects we had, either buddy or ropy maple syrup, the team decided to focus on ropy maple syrup. We chose this one, because it held a unique idea and approach to revalorize a maple syrup that had no value, even negative value considering the costs of waste management. However, the initial concept of working with the sugar shack tubing system or improving production equipment stood. After some research and thinking back to Marie Filteau’s presentation, we discussed the usage of dextranase to treat ropy maple syrup in these possible locations in the maple syrup production process.
We also talked about the necessity of later comparing our final ideas for the project with something that was already done, especially in iGEM. Outside iGEM, we did research on the use of dextranase in the sugar industry. We also talked to our relatives, including maple syrup producers close to some members of the team, and friends about our project ideas to receive some honest feedback on some of our ideas. We wanted to know what questions did this subject bring out.
May 14th 2020
We spoke to Luc Lagacé, a researcher, microbiologist and expert in maple syrup from the ACER Research Center, a research center focused on maple syrup. We discussed the flavor defect problem and its impact on the market. We specially put emphasis on learning new information on the impact of ropy and buddy syrup on the producers of maple syrup. We learned which regions were the most affected by these types of flavors defects, what were the volumes rejected, and the origin of the problem. The origin of the problem was discussed too. Dr. Luc Lagacé also told us that the ropy syrup was not the best project we could choose from an entrepreneurship point of view, because it is not that recurrent. He proceeded to suggest we focus our work on buddy syrup.
May 20th 2020
Once again, the team reassessed the choice of the project after the interview with Luc Lagacé. Three distinct ideas came out of our meeting :
- Continue with our project idea, a dextranase treatment implemented in the maple syrup production process.
- Transform invaluable syrup into another product such as a biofuel.
- Develop a kit that would help producers detect molecules that cause buddy syrup.
The team decided to continue working on project ideas 1 and 3 of our last meeting. The research continued on these three subjects as we pursued our list of experts we wished to consult.
Meanwhile, the survey for producers started to take form as we selected simple and specific questions targeting their needs concerning ropy and buddy syrup as well as their general perception of today’s maple syrup industry.
May 25th 2020
We sent our producers survey to Jean-Francois Sénéchal, one of our first experts contacted, for reviewing purposes. As a sciences focused ethics professor and consultant, he provided us with feedback on many of the questions we had planned for the producers. The feedback taken into consideration and modifications made to our survey (see MAPLE PRODUCERS SURVEY section) , we started contacting individual producers from a contacts list elaborated from their location to ensure a good representation of every major region of Quebec. We limited our survey scope to the province of Quebec because it represents 90% of the total maple syrup industry in Canada (PPAQ, personal communication, 2020) and made contact in French easier.
June 6th 2020
We interviewed an advisor (prefered to stay anonymous) from the food inspection branch of the MAPAQ (Quebec Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food) to discuss laws related to maple syrup in Quebec. It enlightened maple syrup’s definition in Quebec and our inability to add pre- or post- processing agents to maple syrup while conserving it is authenticity, both physically and legally. In other words, it would not be considered maple syrup, but rather a derivative of maple syrup. They suggested we focus on maple syrup transformation or revalorisation of the waste of the maple syrup industry. They also said that the answers of our producers survey will be a key point, because it is primordial that they do not think we want to defraud maple syrup.
Following our talk with the MAPAQ, we envisioned transforming buddy syrup into an alcoholic beverage.
We also achieved a milestone concerning our producers survey when we decided to contact maple producers clubs scattered between every major region of the province of Quebec, which accounts for hundreds, if not thousands of producers. We shifted from a one-on-one conversation at a time with a producer to a province-wide exchange of ideas and opinions. Doing so, we vastly improved our survey’s value by gathering dozens of responses.
June 30th 2020
Later on, we proceeded to interview Vincent Poisson, a forest engineer and a consultant for the “Club acéricole du Sud du Québec”, one of many clubs to help producers with technical management. One of our members discussed the project with him. They explained that there were already projects that work on transforming one of the defective syrup, specifically buddy syrup, into alcoholic drinks. We then dropped this idea and began thinking about other options he proposed to us like making a biofuel. Still, it was not economically profitable because a barrel of bud syrup cost $700 and a barrel of isopropanol can be sold for only $400. We also thought it could be a good idea to do a revalorisation of buddy syrup and sell it to pastry compagnies, because these companies will not use the sugar from ropy syrup since its quality is not the best. He encouraged us to contact the Producteurs et productrices acéricoles du Québec (PPAQ, French for Maple Producers of Quebec, a private maple syrup federation) and Jean-Michel Lavoie which we would do later.
This expert in the maple industry radically oriented the direction of our project by telling us that the ropy syrup problem could be more recurrent in the future. There are more and more industrial producers of maple syrup that store their syrup at a stable but higher temperature compared to non-industrial producers. This will cause a higher proliferation of microorganisms resulting in more dextrans and more ropy syrup. Climate change will also amplify this problem in the years to come. This information is important for our project, because we now know that the problem we want to solve could get bigger.
July 6th 2020
We decided on the project we wanted to work on : maple syrup. More particularly, we wanted to use synthetic biology to control the composition of the biofilm found in the tubing system connecting the maple trees to the sugar shack. This biofilm is the cause of many flavor defects that can reduce or prevent (in the case of ropy maple syrup) income to the producers. From the start, we had a strong value of revalorisation of lesser quality maple syrup.
July 6th 2020
Jean-Michel Lavoie, a professor at University of Sherbrooke in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology Engineering, studies detoxification and fermentation on buddy syrup. He is able to make strong and soft alcohol with this type of maple syrup.
We explained to him our previous ideas and why they did not work (biofilm and ropy syrup). He said that working on the revalorisation of the waste in the maple syrup industry is a good project and that the public would be likely to accept it. If we find a way to sell our product correctly it should be fine. He liked our ideas about making an industrial syrup, doing fermentation or maybe making an alcoholic drink with ropy syrup. However, he warned us on the difficulty of breaking the polycarbohydrates (dextrans). Aside from other recommendations, we were already unsure of which flavors defects we would work on.
July 8th 2020
One of our most important meetings was held on this day. Taking into consideration every insight we had from experts until then, we finally decided that we wanted to work on ropy syrup. There are several reasons behind this decision. First, we already knew a number of people working on making alcoholic beverages with buddy syrup. Also, there are only a few people working on improving ropy syrup. We knew that ropy syrup is a problem that will probably worsen in the future like Mr. Poisson suggested. Despite it now being approximately only 0,2% (PPAQ, personal communication, 2020) of all the production of maple syrup, ropy syrup remains an important problem for the industry in the foreseeable future.
Our biggest worry was that if we used synthetic biology on ropy syrup to make it a valuable product, the product could not be called maple syrup according to the law as discussed in our interview with the MAPAQ. However we got reassured by M. Lavoie that this aspect should not stop us from finding a solution to an issue for which there are no current alternatives.
This final project decision also impacted our planning for the 2021 edition, as it would be the continuation of the project as a goal of making a “ universal ” base product that can then be transformed into other products in the food industry.
July 13th 2020
With our final project idea in mind, we decided to share it with our community. One of our members did a radio interview on Radio Canada, a national news broadcaster, explaining the work our iGEM team is planning to do to help the maple industry. She discussed the iGEM competition, our team and the negative impact of ropy syrup. This interview was not a final presentation of our project. It was a way to communicate a science and community based problem to the public. We really wanted to inform Quebeckers that young scientists are truly interested to maintain and improve the value of this patrimony.
July 24th 2020
We had a meeting with another representative of the PPAQ. He informed us that the cost for producers to get rid of ropy syrup is not really clear, but they aim to resell it between $1 and $1.25 ± 10% per pound, plus marketing fees. We also asked for more recent and precise statistics. Because we asked this question, we now know that between 54 and 60% of the destroyed syrup is ropy syrup. In 2019, 0.5% of the syrup was retained and at least half is eliminated. The quantity of syrup retained by year has been increasing over the past three years: 250,000 lb (2017), 375,000 lb (2018), 500,000 lb (2019). Since retained syrup is proportional to the total production, we concluded that the economic opportunities of revaluing these products will continue to increase in the near future.
We wanted to know if the reuse of ropy syrup had already been considered by the PPAQ or the Union des producteurs agricoles (UPA, French for Agricultural Producers Union). He explained that some people wanted to work on it, but that nothing was started on the science side.
Another important fact is that approximately 95% of the ropy maple syrup produced is sent to the PPAQ. Around 5% is undeclared, because the producers prefer to get rid of it themselves without telling the PPAQ to avoid paying extra handling fees.
August 5th 2020
The analysis of the results of the surveyed maple producers was finished. The conclusions drawn from their responses confirmed even more our choice of project of working on ropy syrup. See MAPLE PRODUCERS SURVEY ANALYSIS section for further details. We decided to keep the survey open for two additional weeks in case of a surge of new responses or new producers perspectives.
August 12th 2020
While focusing on the science aspects of our project, we took the time to contact other experts on structural biology and biochemistry to validate our approach with dextranase candidates and methodology. To talk about our dextranase candidates, we contacted Dr Stéphane Gagné and Dr Patrick Lagüe, professors of the Department of Biochemistry, Microbiology and Bioinformatics, Faculty of Sciences and Engineering, Université Laval. This meeting was the first of many to develop our dextranase.
August 17th 2020
Another major meeting took place with the PPAQ (Producteurs et productrices acéricoles du Québec, French for Maple Producers of Quebec) to discuss a potential confidentiality agreement to gain funding, resources and information for our project. For the team, this was an important breakthrough, because we proved we had a feasible and valuable idea that drew the attention of the most important maple syrup organisation in Quebec, if not Canada or internationally. We even learned that they were looking into ropy syrup revalorisation, but did not have a clear solution for it. aSAP could be the solution they were looking for.
August 24th 2020
Meeting with Dr Rong Shi, Dr Manon Couture and Dr Simon Hardy, professors of the Department of Biochemistry, Microbiology and Bioinformatics, Faculty of Sciences and Engineering, Université Laval to discuss our project modeling and strategy to design our candidate dextranase.
September 19th 2020
We finished the survey for the maple syrup consumers (general population) and we submitted it to Jean-Francois Sénéchal, an ethics professor and consultant, to get his insight on our proposed questions and structure. We then sent it to our university’s ethics reviewing group for further improvements to its ethical significance. We plan on releasing the survey to the general population after the Giant Jamboree to continue our human practices for next year.
- Lagacé, L., Camara, M., Leclerc, S., Charron, C., & Sadiki, M. (2018). Chemical and microbial characterization of ropy maple sap and syrup. Maple Syrup Digest, 9–19.
- N’guyen, G. Q., Martin, N., Jain, M., Lagacé, L., Landry, C. R., & Filteau, M. (2018). A systems biology approach to explore the impact of maple tree dormancy release on sap variation and maple syrup quality. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 14658.
Overview
Here are some examples of questions included in the maple producers survey we conducted from June to August 2020. Our goal was to gather their opinions about the maple industry, our proposed implementation of our project ideas (which were still in development at the time of the survey), their economical situation, and their desires concerning a solution for buddy or ropy syrup. We also took into consideration other problems they could have reported. Their responses highly helped our team to refine our project ideas and choose a solution to a real problem they have to deal with.
This survey was also a means of communication between the producers and our team. Producers did not have to provide their contact information if they preferred to stay anonymous, but we were pleased to see that, of the 50 responses gathered, 80% of respondents showed interest to keep in touch with our project. We are planning on getting back to them as soon as November 2020; we could not do so before due to the focus put on perfecting the concepts of our project. We did not want to give false hopes to the producers before we could confirm its feasibility.
- In which region do you produce maple syrup? If more than one region is concerned, choose the one involving the majority of your production.
- In the last 10 years, which of the following economical loss causes were the most important?
- Natural or transformation related defect (class 1), microbiological defect (class 2), chemical defect (class 3), non identified defect (class 4), buddy syrup (class 5), ropy syrup (class 6), equipment maintenance. *The classes were known to the producers, they are given by the PPAQ.
- At which frequency would they happen?
- Does not apply, every year, every 2 to 3 years, every 4 to 5 years, more than every 5 years.
- In the last 5 years, how many barrels* on average are lost due to the presence of ropy syrup per season of production?
- In the last 5 years, how many barrels* on average are devalorized due to buddy syrup per season of production? *typical production size unit for maple syrup, 1 barrel = 159 litres.
- Would you be willing to include, in the maple syrup production chain, processes using technological agents if they reduce production losses and are safe for consumption?
- How much would you be willing to invest to include a system reducing undesirable syrup?
- I would not invest, $1 to $100, $101 to $200, $201 to $500, $501 to $1000, more than $1000.
- Do you have any preoccupations concerning the use of technological agents to reduce the quantity of undesirable syrup produced?
This is not an exhaustive list of questions from the survey, they are sampled to show the different aspects taken into consideration.
MAPLE PRODUCERS
SURVEY ANALYSIS
Here are the conclusions achieved from the analysis of all the responses we gathered from our survey directed to maple producers.
- The usage of a technological agent is well perceived if it is able to improve the quality and the income related to the product.
- Buddy maple syrup is a more common problem than ropy syrup.
- Ropy syrup, even if it is a minor problem, is an important problem for the producers. Some regions and producers are more affected than others, sometimes leading to important economical losses.
- The majority of producers demand more investments in research to solve the problem of lesser quality maple syrup.