Alan:
> > > Where are you from..if you don't mind me asking? I'm in
> > > Bad Kreuznach in Germany.

Carol:
> > I'm in Santa Cruz, California.  Why, may I ask, do you ask?
> > (Aren't we all so polite! :D )
> >
> I ask because we may be communicating with each other for a long time.
> Apart from the fact that it is "nice to know" there would be no
> point in me quoting German papers if you don't read German, for
> example.

Good point.  All the German I know is... well... I shouldn't even try,
since I don't know how to spell it. :D

>  > > > (1) What is it that happens to nuts as they age (become out-of-season)
> > > >     that makes them no longer acceptable?
> > > >
> > > Apparently (according to others in this list) nuts ARE acceptable
> > > out of season if they are soaked for at least a day.
> >
> > I realize that, but my question was about the newly fallen nut vs.
> > the older nut.  I personally have never read about levels of enzyme
> > inhibitors changing as the nut ages, unsprouted (though I have yet to
> > read the nut article Tom recommended, and I might find it there).  I
> > rather doubt that there would be a difference, because a falling nut
> > has no idea what's in store for it when it hits the ground.
> >
> You are correct in principle IMHO. OTOH, a stored nut is a dried nut
> which has never been subjected to water and hence has never had its
> enzyme inhibitors neutralised. I personally, for example, have
> digestive problems with old, dried nuts but have no problems at all
> with fresh. Try both out for yourself and report back.

I'll try, but it's hard to know the age of the nuts you're getting
unless you get them directly from the tree or the grower.  Neither of
those options is available to me at the present.  But I'll keep it in
mind...

> > My understanding is that the enzyme inhibitors are there to keep the
> > nut/seed in a state of suspended animation, not so much to prevent it
> > from being digested by others, but to prevent self-digestion (a compo-
> > nent of most rotting).
>
> Since when does a live nut "rot" or "digest itself"???

That's just the point.  A live one doesn't.  When living things are
not in suspended animation, but actively alive, they are filled with
enzymes that could be digesting their component parts, but the major-
ity of those enzymes are controlled and kept from doing that.  This
control takes energy.  A sleeping seed is in a different situation.
Most seeds contain the very enzymes that they have inhibitors for,
but when they're dormant, they have no influx of energy, so those
enzymes have to be locked up chemically.

All this isn't something I can reference, since it was part of a
lecture and not something I read.  My apologies.

Also, though the idea of enzyme inhibitors as preventers of diges-
tion by those who may eat the seeds makes sense when the seed isn't
chewed, it's a very different situation if it is.  If a particular
seed always gets chewed (likely for those that are large), the diges-
tive enzymes of the chewer exert no evolutionary pressure whatsoever.
If, on the other hand, a seed always goes straight through, it's a
different story.  So, as seeds come in all sizes and styles, the
situation is complicated and doesn't lend itself to wide generaliza-
tions.

> > > > (2) Don't the various things grouped under the common term "nuts"
> > > >     actually come from different botanical groups?  Almonds, peanuts,
> > > >     and cashews, for example, grow in such different ways.
> > >
> > > It makes no difference as nuts are essentially seeds..and are
> > > not meant to be eaten really (unless they use the "host" as
> > > a means of propagating..and are thus indigestible if not chewed).
> >
> > I, like Kirt, have some trouble with the idea that seeds are not
> > meant to be eaten.  If they are not, does that mean that animals for
> > whom seeds are a major food source are not meant to exist?
>
> Which animal eats seeds rather than the "flesh" surrounding some of
> them? Which animal gains nutrients from seeds alone and is this
> animal supposedly one of our forefathers?

Birds, for one, are real big seed fans.  Some species eat little else.
Whether they are our forefathers or not has nothing to do with it. :D
As I said just below, I'm not talking about humans here.  I'm merely
answering your claim that "seeds.. are not meant to be eaten".  Since
you didn't say "..by us", it looked like you meant "..by anything".

> > The value of seeds as food for humans is a different question (and
> > one which I cannot answer).
> >
> > > > (3) Could it be, since they are so different, that some nuts have
> > > >     enzyme inhibitors as well, while some don't?
> > >
> > > They might look different but their purpose in Nature is identical.
> > > Thus they stand to gain nothing by being chewed and digested.
> >
> > True, but they didn't evolve in a vacuum.  Similarly, the purpose of
> > a deer's muscles could be said to be to get that deer away from its
> > predators as fast as possible so that it can live to have more baby
> > deer, but the deer's predators have been evolving right along side
> > them, and the fact that wolves and others evolved the ability to make
> > use of those deer muscles as food in no way denies the purpose that
> > those muscles may hold for the deer.
> >
> I fail to see the connection here between deer and their predators and
> enzyme inhibitors in seeds. Please explain Carol.

It's a very similar situation that I thought might make my point more
clear.  Guess it didn't work. :)

So I'll try again... Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that
ALL enzyme inhibitors in seeds are there because they protect some
parts of the seeds from being digested as food.  Fine.  But my point
is that it certainly doesn't follow from that statement that seeds
are never meant, in the grand scheme of things, to be eaten, and that
no animal could have evolved to use these same seeds as food.  I used
the deer example because if I had used fruit, someone probably would
have popped up with "But fruit WANTS to be eaten!"  I also chose deer
because no one can dispute that they are a natural food for wolves,
whether they want to be or not.

The problem might be that I understood you to be saying something
which, in fact, you never meant to say.

> Best regards,

To you too :)
Carol