Rendered at 10:13:21 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
marojejian 3 days ago [-]
I gather that the claims about mycorrhizal networks have been overstated or at least the evidence is limited. e.g. see this episode of Science Fictions
But even in the most conservative reading of the evidence, there is a lot of amazing ecology going on here. And the economic analogy seems apt. I buy her argument that it's worth investing a lot more to explore these interactions.
Stepping back - evolution has had a vastly greater amount of time to deal with economic & game theoretic situations than we have. Learning more about what type of strategies have survived the test of time could be very important. Especially as we are currently at the beginning of an explosive change in our own ecosystem (and I ain't talking about biodiversity or climate change...)
n4r9 1 hours ago [-]
I know people that work in mycology and plant pathology. My impression is that the "wood wide web" is generally a well-accepted and well-established concept. It's commonly accepted that mycorrhizal networks exist, that they benefit both plant and fungus, and that they allow propagation of resources between trees. There is some debate over the anthropomorphisation and the idea of "mother trees", but that's kind of what you expect when it comes to science popularisation in the media.
FWIW the book "Entangled Life" is okay as a popular science book, but Sheldrake isn't really a practicing research mycologist, so you can't expect too much from it scientifically. And it has some... slightly weird bits (do you really want to picture the author rolling around naked in some leaves?).
1 hours ago [-]
Melatonic 5 hours ago [-]
Without them the earth would be completely covered in layers of wood - can't have those pesky trees ruining the planet !
messe 5 hours ago [-]
No shortage of fossil fuels though...
Utilera 1 minutes ago [-]
[dead]
contingencies 6 hours ago [-]
IMHO basically we know very little. One thing we do know is that they are not only critical for breaking down old biomass but are 100% non-negotiable partners for many specific angiosperms. Once you lose the soil biome, those species just don't grow. Therefore when transplanting something it can be handy to bundle a sample of nearby earth at an appropriate range of depths. This can sometimes enhance germination and growth potential for difficult species by including a fungal colony... especially in difficult biomes like denuded or pool soils where a critical fungal symbiote is generally more likely.
This technique was taught to me by propagating native plant scientists here in Australia, which has a great number of unique plant species owing to its historic isolation and consequent evolutionary independence.
Vishal_Max 6 hours ago [-]
We know so little. We perceive and conceive things only to the extent that our minds and senses allow us to. Maybe there’s much more to reality than we can comprehend, and our current human capabilities simply aren’t advanced enough to perceive it yet. A few hundred years ago, we didn’t even know that microbes existed or that the light spectrum extended beyond what our eyes could see. And that’s what makes the future so exciting!
N_Lens 5 hours ago [-]
I suppose a climate change will interact with fungal networks in interesting ways.
pjmlp 46 minutes ago [-]
We know for sure that there have been multiple climate changes on the planet, all of the previous ones had influences on the animals living here, including our species, so naturally this one will be the same.
The golden question is are we going to be the next dinosaurs, or get lucky this time around?
n4r9 2 hours ago [-]
Yes; it's tricky to predict. On one hand, fungi tends to love moisture, so long hot Summers might work against them. On the other hand, fungi that parasitise on plants might do better if the plants are drought-stressed and less able to put up defenses.
https://sciencefictionspod.substack.com/p/episode-91-entangl...
But even in the most conservative reading of the evidence, there is a lot of amazing ecology going on here. And the economic analogy seems apt. I buy her argument that it's worth investing a lot more to explore these interactions.
Stepping back - evolution has had a vastly greater amount of time to deal with economic & game theoretic situations than we have. Learning more about what type of strategies have survived the test of time could be very important. Especially as we are currently at the beginning of an explosive change in our own ecosystem (and I ain't talking about biodiversity or climate change...)
FWIW the book "Entangled Life" is okay as a popular science book, but Sheldrake isn't really a practicing research mycologist, so you can't expect too much from it scientifically. And it has some... slightly weird bits (do you really want to picture the author rolling around naked in some leaves?).
This technique was taught to me by propagating native plant scientists here in Australia, which has a great number of unique plant species owing to its historic isolation and consequent evolutionary independence.
The golden question is are we going to be the next dinosaurs, or get lucky this time around?