[HN Gopher] World's oldest tree? Genetic analysis traces evoluti...
___________________________________________________________________
World's oldest tree? Genetic analysis traces evolution of iconic
Pando forest
Author : pseudolus
Score : 106 points
Date : 2024-11-04 22:58 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| mobeets wrote:
| The fact that Pando is a single organism is so confusing to me.
| I'm guessing there are more forests like Pando that are also a
| single organism? Is this something unique to this particular
| species?
| edf13 wrote:
| Just think of it as the root system - the "trees" are all
| sprouting from that.
| torlok wrote:
| Black Locust can produce sprouts out of its root system, but
| from what I've read a single organism can cover up to 1ha, and
| the sprouts become independent eventually, so not exactly the
| same.
| jprd wrote:
| They are also wicked with thorns when young. Someone planted
| a few in the 70s around here (Pine Bush reserve in Upstate
| NY), and they won't go away. They thrive in the pine bush and
| steal from the native environment. Prescribed burns help on
| the reserve bits, but on the private properties surrounding
| it is a nightmare. The amount of scars I have from these
| invasive trees' thorns is nuts.
| nemo44x wrote:
| Sounds like rhizomes. These are not uncommon in plants.
| Bluegrass lawn for instance spreads this way. But yes I never
| imagined a similar thing with trees.
| Suppafly wrote:
| I believe the difference is that rhizomes are special
| structures meant for reproduction, whereas with Pando and
| other quaking aspens, it's just normal tree roots that pop up
| near the surface and start growing into trees.
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| Pretty much all plants have similar abilities to reproduce
| clonally as a byproduct of how they grow. Normally we don't
| count the individuals as a collective organism the same way we
| do Pando though.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| I thought the scientific consensus was Pando does not
| actually reproduce anymore and is shrinking
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| I've never heard that. The aboveground stems of aspens live
| just over a century, so Pando would be dead very quickly
| (in relative terms) if that was true. I see some articles
| online that new shoots are struggling to survive because of
| herbivores though.
| sidewndr46 wrote:
| apparently I had it wrong. The net size is decreasing
| over time, but new shoots do still emerge and mature into
| healthy structures
| dreamcompiler wrote:
| Forest Service says it's showing signs of decline due to
| "... a lack of regeneration, along with insects and
| disease."
|
| https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/fishlake/home/?cid=STELPRDB5
| 3...
| Buttons840 wrote:
| You seem to dismiss that Pando is uniquely special. The claim
| is that Pando is the oldest organism on Earth. Do you
| disagree? If so, what are some organisms that might be older?
| bloak wrote:
| See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_longest-
| living_organis...
|
| I've not yet seen an explanation of what counts as a single
| "organism" for these purposes and the estimated ages are
| all over the place.
| Buttons840 wrote:
| My guess at a definition: All parts connected, having the
| same DNA, and supporting each other by sharing nutrients.
| AlotOfReading wrote:
| I'm not dismissing that Pando is old or interesting. I'm
| saying that clonal reproduction is not especially uncommon
| in the plant kingdom and that we typically don't consider
| the resulting plants part of the same collective organism.
|
| The same type of vegetative reproduction is happening every
| time a potato or garlic clove is planted, for example.
| Asparagus is an even closer analogy to Pando.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| The roots of Pando are all connected though and a potato
| plant from a piece definitely isn't.
|
| > Generally speaking, yes. Each of Pando's branches is
| connected to the others through a shared root system.
| digging wrote:
| Pando isn't a bunch of individual clones though, it's a
| single contiguous organism.
| sqeaky wrote:
| What is the dividiing line between single organism and
| clones with connecting structure, like shared roots?
|
| It seems like a fuzzy gradient to me. Maybe some biologist
| can share what makes the distinction clear, but I can
| imagine a gradient ranging from fully distinct autonomous
| disconnected clones all the way to clearly a single
| organism that only grows outward into a large sphere.
|
| Clearly Pando is somewhere in the middle of this gradient.
| What is Pando's position on that gradient and why is "bunch
| of individual clones" somewhere else? How is another tree
| sharing a roots not a single individual too?
| digging wrote:
| Super confused here because the distinction seems
| completely clear to me? Relatively few plants, when
| mature, will start growing clones up from their roots,
| but it's a known growth pattern. They're called suckers,
| and I've never heard them referred to as distinct
| individuals.
|
| But _most_ plants can be cloned by taking a cutting and
| giving it continuous water + air and letting it start
| growing a new root system. I 've never heard anybody
| suggest the cutting is not a new, distinct plant.
| Gravityloss wrote:
| That also has made me wonder. If these are common but not
| generally mapped or surveyed, then it'd be likely this is not
| oldest etc...
| xattt wrote:
| The name Pando adds to the mystery of the organism. If it was
| called Fish Lake forest or something, it would be hard to draw
| any attention.
| space_oddity wrote:
| Pando has an almost mythical ring to it
| cg5280 wrote:
| All quaking aspens can reproduce through their roots systems
| (as well as by seeds); you typically see them as clusters in
| the forests they reside instead of peppered around like other
| trees. Pando is unique because it can _only_ reproduce
| asexually as well as its huge size. Most aspen colonies are not
| nearly as big.
| Suppafly wrote:
| >Pando is unique because it can only reproduce asexually
|
| Is that true? I've seen it mentioned in non-scientific
| articles, but have never seen anything scientific saying so.
| I'm not sure why Pando would be different from any other
| member of its species.
| dvh wrote:
| Japanese knotweed in Europe
| Suppafly wrote:
| >The fact that Pando is a single organism is so confusing to
| me.
|
| All of the tree stalks are connected to the same roots, so it's
| all one big organism.
| jboggan wrote:
| If you're ever in central Utah you should make the trip to see
| Pando, it grows beside Fish Lake which is teeming with life, and
| surrounded by beautiful hills and mountains that make for great
| campsite views. The lake is full of landlocked kokanee salmon
| that never see an ocean in their lifetime.
| space_oddity wrote:
| Have you camped there?
| borg16 wrote:
| i was once on a solo road trip. I took a turn by chance and
| ended up near this lake and saw the Pando being talked about
| here. Talk about coincidence!
| pfdietz wrote:
| Some lakes like these have populations maintained by stocking.
|
| https://theonion.com/wildlife-officials-restock-lake-by-drop...
| jayrot wrote:
| Nature, uhh, finds a way.
| fritzo wrote:
| TIL Pando is not just an especially large quaking aspen, but
| rather a triploid mutant that can reproduce only asexually.
| dvh wrote:
| I once spoke with fish biologist about goldfish (or was it
| carasius? I don't remember), they reproduce via gynogenesis,
| it's like pathogenesis but they need some trigger like other
| fish spawning, and I said surely there must be some hidden pond
| in some misty mountains in China where there are still male
| goldfish. I asked him if he believe such hidden pond could
| exist somewhere and he said no and mumbled something about
| triploids. Scientists are not romantic.
| vanderZwan wrote:
| They're romantic until romanticism gets in the way of
| dispassionate interpretations of what the data tells them to
| be the most likely truth. Would you rather have them make
| stuff up and undermine the very purpose of their job?
| PittleyDunkin wrote:
| I think there's a middle ground we call "the capacity for
| imagination", which can be both romantic and need not
| conflict with empirical analysis.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| > they reproduce via gynogenesis, it's like pathogenesis
|
| That's an interesting choice of word construction.
|
| _parthenogenesis_ - > virgin birth.
|
| _gynecogenesis_ - > woman birth.
|
| [ _gynogenesis_ is an impossible form, and _pathogenesis_
| would refer to "disease birth"]
|
| I can see how "virgin birth" is distinctive compared to
| ordinary birth. How is "woman birth" supposed to be
| different? Are people not normally born from... women?
| dvh wrote:
| pathogenesis was spellcheck error (I meant parthenogenesis)
| and gynogenesis is real
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynogenesis
| deaddodo wrote:
| > How is "woman birth" supposed to be different? Are people
| not normally born from... women?
|
| It's referring to the _to_ , not the _from_. But in either
| case, yes; however, males are usually involved. In this
| case, it 's woman exclusive.
|
| They simply use sperm to stimulate the urge to
| procreate/kick off the process. Thus, the need for other
| species to be spawning nearby.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| Well, the article says this:
|
| > Pando is triploid, meaning that its cells contain three
| copies of each chromosome, rather than two. As a result, Pando
| cannot reproduce sexually and mix its DNA with that of other
| trees
|
| but this seems to misunderstand the nature of plants. In an
| animal, this kind of ploidy variability wouldn't just make the
| organism sterile, it would kill it. Plants are more tolerant,
| and many species are known which have done what this article
| claims is impossible. For example, redwoods are hexaploid,
| which doesn't interfere with their reproduction.
|
| Wikipedia:
|
| > Polyploidy has come to be understood as quite common in
| plants--with estimates ranging from 47% to 100% of flowering
| plants and extant ferns having derived from ancient polyploidy.
|
| ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoioideae )
|
| It just isn't an obstacle. I don't know what the article author
| was thinking.
| Suppafly wrote:
| >It just isn't an obstacle. I don't know what the article
| author was thinking.
|
| Probably googling a term, learning how it applies to mammals
| and assuming that's true for plants as well.
| ljsprague wrote:
| >redwoods are hexaploid, which doesn't interfere with their
| reproduction
|
| Six is divisible by two though.
| carom wrote:
| The oldest non-colonal tree is in California at 4800 some years
| old.
|
| 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuselah_(pine_tree)
| Suppafly wrote:
| Anyone know if you can get sprouts from Pando to start your own
| mini version?
| lialopx wrote:
| k
| lialopx wrote:
| hola?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-05 23:00 UTC)