Scientists hope deeper-rooted soybeans can withstand climate extremes and store more carbon. JOSHUA A. BICKEL and ANNIKA HAMMERSCHLAG Updated Fri, September 18, 2026 at 6:01 AM PDT Climate roots carbon capture. Ashish Rajurkar, a research scientist at the Salk Institute, digs out root samples from genetically-engineered soybeans Tuesday, Sept. 1, 2026, at a research field in Urbana, Ill. (AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel) (AP Photo/Joshua A. Bickel) CHAMPAIGN, Ill. (AP) - Research scientist Ashish Rajurkar kneels in the dirt, lifting a large clod of soil tangled around a soybean plant. He knocks away pieces of earth from the plant's roots, which slope straight down instead of out to the side like typical soybean plants. Researchers hope roots like these could help crops withstand some effects of climate change while also drawing more carbon from the atmosphere and storing it underground. Carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels traps heat in the atmosphere, driving human-caused climate change. For years, scientists have explored ways to remove some of that carbon from the atmosphere, including through direct air capture, changes to ocean chemistry so seawater can absorb more carbon, and reforestation. Now, researchers at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies are testing whether deeper root systems could become another tool. But scientists still need to show how much additional carbon those roots can store under real farming conditions, how long the carbon would remain underground and whether the crops can maintain yields. An $18 million grant from the Bezos Earth Fund will help Salk researchers test those questions in the field by measuring how resilient these plants are to drought and other climate stressors, how much carbon they can store and for how long, and how to get the plants onto farms at scale. Wolfgang Busch, director of the institute's Harnessing Plants Initiative, said the issue is pressing. "We are actually steering in a direction that is very concerning," he said. "It will become harder to grow enough food for enough people." Scientists use genes to create deeper roots. Over the last six years, Salk scientists uncovered the genetic information of hundreds of versions of common row crop plants such as soybeans and sorghum from around the world, creating an "encyclopedia" of plant genomes, said Todd Michael, a research professor at the institute. After identifying 347 genes related to carbon storage and root growth, scientists were able to edit the plants' DNA and create ones with roots that penetrate the soil further down. "We wanted to leverage the natural variation of a given plant," Michael said. "We just have to be able to make the right crosses to bring in those genetics." During droughts, they hope the roots will allow plants to access water below the top layer of soil while also storing carbon farther underground, where it may be less vulnerable to being released when farmers till their fields. Researchers are also trying to boost carbon storage by growing larger root systems so more carbon-rich plant material is left in the soil, and by increasing suberin, a cork-like substance in roots that contains carbon and decomposes more slowly than many other plant tissues. Researchers hypothesize that more steeply shaped root systems may also allow farmers to plant more crops in a smaller area, potentially increasing yield. Salk scientists think longer, bigger roots could also absorb more nitrogen and other fertilizer runoff, which can cause algae blooms and lead to low-oxygen environments that kill marine life. Based on earlier lab results, Salk researchers estimate one hectare (2.5 acres) of deeper- and bigger-rooted soybean plants could store an additional metric ton of carbon dioxide per year. How long that carbon stays stored depends on how deep the roots can grow and the surrounding environment in the soil. Initial results from the field are expected this fall, Busch said. At one of these field sites at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Salk is growing deep-rooted soybean plants under a canopy that can open and close to control the amount of rainfall plants receive, testing how the plants perform in drought conditions. Using underground cameras and sensing equipment, research partners at the university can track the amount of carbon in the soil and view the root structure's growth in real-time. But there is still uncertainty about how these plants will perform outside a lab. Salk researchers hope data collection at the site in Illinois, along with ones in Missouri, Kansas and Iowa, will provide accurate estimates of carbon storage and crop yield. Because most plant breeders haven't focused on root systems in the past, "we don't really know what the real trade-off is," Busch said. "You have to test it in the field." Rapid adoption relies on industry and farmers. Busch acknowledges that getting new seed technology into farmers' fields can be difficult. Having a crop that has clear benefits to farmers and large seed companies is key to getting it adopted rapidly. He noted that companies and farmers adopted herbicide-resistant crops in less than a decade once the technology was introduced. "Historically it's clear, if you have a technology that is interesting to a big seed company, it will go out there very, very fast," he said. And large-scale adoption on farm fields will be required to have the kind of carbon-reduction impact Salk scientists want. A 2025 study that Busch co-authored modeled that about a gigaton of carbon dioxide per year could be removed from the atmosphere by 2040 if deeper-rooted soybean, corn, cotton and canola crops were adopted in countries where genetically-modified crops are already grown. Adoption could be rapid because deeper-rooted crops could be planted on current farm fields using existing agricultural infrastructure and land, according to the study. But Busch also notes that crop and seed development can take years. Ambitious solutions, he said, require fast funding. "It's a race against time," he said of climate change. "We are racing against limiting the damage and crossing tipping points, where it's much harder to return from." The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org. Follow Annika Hammerschlag on Instagram @ahammergram and Joshua A. Bickel on Instagram, Bluesky and X @joshuabickel.

Climate review linked to lawsuits was 'sham' shrouded in 'secrecy,' Attorneys General allege. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine produced a biased climate report designed to bolster lawsuits against fossil fuel companies, a coalition of state attorneys general alleges in a Thursday letter obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation. The attorneys general allege NASEM's July report on attributing extreme weather events to climate change was shaped by funders, researchers and legal advocates connected to climate litigation - including the landmark Suncor Energy v. County Commissioners of Boulder County case now before the Supreme Court. The coalition is also aiming for NASEM's handling of a separate review of its climate-related work, arguing the organization has failed to adequately address potential conflicts of interest. "However, this review appears to be a sham, as demonstrated by NASEM's secrecy around all aspects of the review process," the Republican attorneys general wrote in their 12-page letter. "A truly independent review would appoint an external panel; use reviewers who are not activists, litigation participants, or NASEM employees; publish the review process and findings; identify the review's scope; and ensure the review's scope addresses the material criticisms of the Chapter." "In July, NASEM released a biased climate-attribution report, entitled 'Attribution of Extreme Weather and Climate Events and Their Impacts 2026,' to aid climate plaintiffs, including in the pending" Suncor case, the coalition alleged. The dispute centers in part on the growing role of "attribution science," which researchers use to assess how climate change influences the likelihood or severity of individual extreme-weather events. That research has increasingly intersected with litigation seeking to hold fossil fuel companies financially responsible for alleged climate-related damages. NASEM's report itself acknowledged potential legal applications for the science, according to the letter. "Reinforcing its intended use in litigation, the Report states that attribution science 'may be relevant to policy and legal decisions pertaining to climate change and liability for losses sustained as a result of extreme weather and climate events,' may be 'useful in estimating marginal damages attributable to climate change,' and may inform 'responsibility or liability determinations,' including 'whether defendants may be held liable' in climate litigation," the attorneys general wrote. The attorneys general allege NASEM's report entered that legal battle at a particularly consequential moment. The letter comes as the Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in Suncor this October. Boulder County and the City of Boulder sued Suncor Energy and ExxonMobil in 2018, seeking damages under Colorado law for alleged harms caused by climate change. The companies argue states cannot use state tort law to regulate alleged harms arising from interstate and international greenhouse-gas emissions and that such claims are governed by federal law. "The timing of the Report's release allowed plaintiffs' amici in Suncor to cite the Report, but prevented critiques from defendants' amici, whose filing deadline had passed," the coalition wrote. The letter specifically points to an amicus brief supporting the plaintiffs that repeatedly cited the NASEM report after its publication. "Notably, one amicus organization supporting plaintiffs in Suncor bragged about the Report's timing, cited the Report over and over on ten of its pages, and received $100 million to 'accelerate climate action' from the Bezos Earth Fund - which also funded NASEM's Report," the attorneys general wrote. They stressed that agencies "may wish to look further into the nature of this convenient coincidence." "The National Academies took taxpayer money and used it to manufacture a scientific-sounding basis for climate lawsuits courts have already rejected, then timed a follow-up report to help plaintiffs in the Suncor case while locking out any rebuttal. Calling their own secret internal review 'independent' is a punchline," Jason Isaac, CEO of the American Energy Institute, told the DCNF. Exploring Travel Maps Discover more Digital Newspaper Access Advertise With Us Subscribing To Newspapers "Federal agencies shouldn't need another minute to cut off funding to an organization laundering climate activism through the National Academies' name," Isaac continued. In the letter, the coalition also singled out the organizations that financed NASEM's report. "Each of the Report's three funders is connected to climate litigation," the letter alleges. The attorneys general point first to the Bezos Earth Fund, which helped fund the NASEM report and previously announced a $100 million grant to the Natural Resources Defense Council and $15 million to the Union of Concerned Scientists. Both organizations submitted amicus briefs supporting the plaintiffs in Suncor, according to the letter. The coalition also highlights financier Robert Litterman and the Heising-Simons Foundation, alleging both have financial or organizational ties to groups involved in climate litigation. "Another Report funder, Robert Litterman, is a board member and major funder for one of the nonprofit organizations that the government plaintiffs identify as providing 'most of the legal work' in Suncor," the attorneys general wrote. Discover more Subscribing To News Newspaper Subscriptions The letter alleges similar connections involving people who contributed input to the report, including Columbia University's Michael Burger. "The Report's Acknowledgments section thanks Michael Burger, without mentioning that Burger is 'Of Counsel' for the Sher Edling law firm," the coalition wrote. Sher Edling has represented state and local governments in numerous climate lawsuits against fossil fuel companies. Burger also co-wrote an amicus brief in Suncor and worked on litigation involving Honolulu, according to the attorneys general. "In other words, the Report gave the plaintiffs' supporters exactly what they needed, exactly when they needed it, to further their litigation goals, without affording the other side an opportunity to weigh in," the attorneys general alleged. "Agencies may wish to investigate this coincidence given the heavy overlap between the Report's funding and development and the Suncor litigation." Bezos Earth Fund, the Heising-Simons Foundation, Litterman and Sher Edling each did not immediately respond to the DCNF's requests for comment. "The National Academies has a history of bias that will not be forgotten just because it's feigning an 'independent' review of the controversial climate science chapter. Climate lawfare is a critical tool for trial lawyers and woke activists to weaponize the courts to push policy through lawfare," O.H. Skinner, Executive Director of Alliance For Consumers, told the DCNF. Skinner added that the activists "have built a huge dark-money-fueled apparatus to boost and support this lawfare and they don't want to see this manual changed." "The Attorneys General are right to question NASEM's federal funding and seek a charter review. As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments in the Suncor case, neutrality needs to be restored, and the radical left-wing apparatus behind these cases questioned at every turn," he continued. "Critics have demonstrated that the Chapter materially misquotes the IPCC, directly contradicts the manual's statistics chapter, was apparently substantially ghost-written by climate plaintiffs' attorney Michael Burger, and had funders, authors, and reviewers that included climate funders, activists, and litigation participants," the attorneys general wrote in the letter. The controversy has also drawn congressional scrutiny. The House Science, Space and Technology Committee previously raised concerns about NASEM's conflict-of-interest policies. "The Congressional committee further noted that NASEM's January 2025 policy changes require NASEM committee members to merely disclose non-financial conflicts, such as professional and legal affiliations, with no protocol for mitigation," the attorneys general wrote. NASEM subsequently launched a review, but the attorneys general argue its structure and lack of publicly available information do little to address their underlying concerns. The coalition is now asking federal agencies to consider whether those alleged problems justify cutting NASEM off from federal funding. "Taxpayer money should not be funding NASEM's biased actions, which warrant suspension or debarment," the attorneys general wrote. "If NASEM continues to lend its imprimatur to litigation-driven advocacy, then Congress should find another source for objective analysis and consider revoking the 1863 charter that designates the Academies as an adviser to the federal government." Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of its original content, please contact [email protected]

Leonardo DiCaprio and Jeff Bezos team up to save endangered species. Emily Burack Tue, August 4, 2026 at 8:04 AM PDT Leonardo DiCaprio and Jeff Bezos's foundations, Re:wild and the Bezos Earth Fund, have teamed up to save 100 of the Earth's most endangered species. Called the Phoenix Species Project, "the effort begins with a $200 million commitment, making it the largest single philanthropic initiative dedicated exclusively to the recovery of critically endangered species across taxonomic groups, a diversity of habitats, and countries," according to a release. "It will provide unprecedented support to help recover 100 species facing imminent extinction, collaborating with Indigenous Peoples, local communities, scientists and conservationists working to secure the future of biodiversity and the planet." The 100 species include mammals, amphibians, reptiles, birds, fish, invertebrates, and plants from 30 countries, including the golden-crowned Sifaka lemur (pictured above), the Visayan warty pig, the Malayan pangolin, the Charco Azul pupfish, and the Torrey Pine tree. "For decades, scientists, Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and conservation leaders have been on the front lines of protecting nature, and what has been made clear through research, is that species on the brink of extinction are often the ones that anchor some of the world's most important ecosystems," DiCaprio said in a statement. "When we protect those species, we also protect the forests, wetlands, grasslands, and oceans they depend on." He added, "The Phoenix Species Project has the potential to drastically shift how we approach conservation and combat the climate crisis at a global scale. By creating the largest philanthropic initiative in history dedicated to the recovery of critically endangered species across continents, made possible by a transformative gift from the Bezos Earth Fund, we have an opportunity to make a lasting impact where it's needed most. The goal is for the Phoenix Species Project to become a global movement that inspires others to invest in nature and help protect our planet." Lauren Sánchez Bezos, vice chair of the Bezos Earth Fund, added, "Kids fall in love with animals before anyone tells them those animals are disappearing. Ask any seven-year-old about their favorite creature. It's something wild. Something most adults have never heard of. What do we tell them when the night parrot or the golden-crowned sifaka isn't there anymore to fall in love with? This project is our answer. One hundred species, thirty countries, and a real commitment to bringing them back. Not managing their decline. Recovering them. That's the whole difference. We know how to do this. We just have to stay committed long enough to see it through." The funding will go to local and international partners around the world, and strategies to revive the species include conservation breeding programs, disease management, and restoring habitats, among others.