Slashdot Mirror
Networking the Redwoods
linuxwrangler writes "SF Gate is reporting that ecology researchers are outfitting a grove of trees with tiny "micromote" sensors to monitor the light, humidity and other conditions as the trees grow. The sensors, running the open-source Tiny OS, form and maintain their own network. This test of the "Smart Dust" concept (mentioned on /. earlier) only uses 50 sensors but scientists hope to be able to deploy the sensors on a large scale to help figure out why California's Redwoods are dying off at an alarming rate."
Since I'm sure most of /. is more interested in coding a 1 square inch sensor than protecting a 300 foot tree, here's some programming background on the little bastards (which I work with on a daily basis, as part of a sensor network research group in a VA university).
- the architecture
The motes run 4MHz or 8MHz processors, with built in memory. The amount of memory varies across mote models (currently Rene, Rene2, Mica, Mica2, Mica2Dot, and SmartDust) but we're talking 16KB to 128KB of program memory, 4KB to 16KB of data memory, and 4Kb to 8KB EEPROM for permanent storage. They have a short range radio capable of I believe 10kbps, and use an active message model to provide what we know as "ports", so that you can direct a message to a specific handler based on its message type. The packet sizes top out at 36 bytes. The motes are powered by two AA batteries, which can last a surprisingly long time if the radio is put to sleep. Your main means for debugging: 3 LEDs ... you can begin to imagine the headaches I face on a daily basis.
- the bridge
When deployed, most motes are programmed with routing protocols to autonomously establish networks, which are used for data aggregation and getting sensor readings around. The network is rooted at a basestation, a "powerful" PC without the restricted computation, communication and power limitations of a mote. This way any complex processing is offloaded to the PC, and the motes don't waste battery power doing stuff the PC can do instead. So what bridges this mote network to a PC? Well, it's a programming board. You plug a mote directly into the thing, and you hook up a db-25 to your parallel port, and a db-9 to your serial port. The parallel port is used to program the mote's instruction memory, and the serial port is used to receive messages sent by the mote to the PC. The mote that's hooked up to the programming board is loaded with code to translate RF packets to UART, and vice versa.
- sensing
Motes are equipped with 10-bit resolution ADC sensors which can read light and temperature. Other sensor boards can be hooked up to motes to read vibration, acceleration, and a bunch of other stuff. The motes commonly read their sensors, stuff the data in a packet, and send it along to the basestation for processing. That's the generic application model, at least.
- security
The main part of our research deals directly with implementing security in the sensor networks. This is far from easy, since you can't even store a public/private key in the mote's limited memory, let alone do anything with it. The protocols used are complex, involving securely distributing keys, efficient authentication protocols, and all this in 16KB of program memory (on Rene2s) INCLUDING the operating system! Just remember that the point isn't to stop a mote from being compromised, it's to realize it's compromised and drop it from the network. There are supposed to be thousands of motes in the network after all, so dropping a bunch won't hurt.
---
Here's hoping that background will help avoid the mass privacy paranoia that we /. readers love so much. At the time of this writing, motes aren't small enough or cheap ($250) enough to produce en masse, nor are they tiny enough to go unnoticed (remember the 2 AA batteries?). Yes, there are exceptions, but 1 square inch are the smallest production versions I know of (Mica2dots). And until they stop running on batteries, their biggest hindrance is their short lifetime, so they currently can't be constantly monitoring anything for months on end.
Aside: Take a look at the Spec. It could change that whole last paragraph. :)
As for the military surveillance stuff, that's what motes are ultimately designed for, to be dropped on
*blinking cursor*
Well, I could be wrong about the relationship between fire and redwood tree germination. Wouldn;t be the first time.
You are right about the fog - we get tons of it in the coastal parts of Humboldt County - and the eastern edge of the redwoods clearly demarks the end of the fog belt.
The definition of rainforest that I'm more familiar with has to do with yearly rainfall - 100 inches (or 254cm). And there is at least 2 parts of California that easily exceed this amount - The Smith River valley near the oregon border and the Matole River valley in southern Humboldt County (both coastal). Last December alone, the town of Honeydew received over 100 inches IN ONE MONTH (while arcata, ca - home of HSU - had just over 30 or so inches in the same month).
Personally its not God I dislike, its his fan club I cant stand (bash.org)
I have trees in my neighborhood here in upstate NY that are a mere hundreds of years old. I used to live within bicycling distance of the very pine tree that Ethan Allen chose as the model for the tree on the Vermont flag over 200 years ago. 400 hundred years isn't really considered an unusual age for a tree in the absence of logging.
No, a tree has no life expectency as such and they do not die simply from old age. Something must kill them, be it disease, parasitic infestation or natural disaster.
The California Redwoods are not merely hundreds of years old, that's how long it takes them to merely reach maturity, say 16ish in human terms. they are thousands of years old, many predating the Christian era.
They are also very hardy trees by any terms. The "Chimney Tree" is hollow, its center being burned out in a forest fire. You can stand inside of it and look out its top at the sky.
This tree is not only still alive but gradually healing itself, regrowing material to replace that lost to the fire, and someday may live to appear completely normal again.
The bark of a redwood is up to one foot thick and acts as an insulator during forest fires and many trees can survive major conflagrations with little more than the loss of some "skin."
A fallen redwood is still alive as well and will start putting out roots into the ground, sprouting several new trunks along the length of the old one.
In their natural enviroment the California Redwood is one of the hardiest trees known to exist. If they are dying there is something terribly, terribly wrong.
While the specifics might be a mystery the generalities are plain. What is wrong is that something has changed their enviroment.
I'll give you three guesses at to what that something might be.
KFG
The destruction of the redwoods was being caused by MAXXAM corporation (parading as Pacific Lumber, Co) as they own many thousands of acres of redwoods and are determined to rape them for all they're worth. Funny, I didn't need any fancy gizmos to figure that out, I just had to take a trip to Freshwater, CA and watch the carnage.
There was an article on www.scitechdaily.com last
... the best "solution" depends on the
week on the subject of forest fires -- controlled burns vs thinning vs let it just happen naturally.
Bottom line
forest, its underlying ecosystem, and past history.
Disclaimer: I live on the prairies in the Great
White North, so what do I know about trees?
Each tree is growing - or dying - slightly differently from its neighbouring trees due to different local conditions. This means we can study the differences between trees and relate them to differences in local conditions. If we can work out why some trees are doing better than others, then we have a chance of working out how to improve the conditions for the trees that are dying. The micromote project is collecting basic information on local conditions such as temperature and humidity which will enable this research to reach conclusions in the next couple of years.
Scroogle
Umm, last time I was in the area a few months ago, given the amount of pollution and traffic in the Bay area and north of the Bay area, I am not surprised the redwoods are dying off.
Except that redwoods are really tolerant (they are a common landscaping tree, for just this reason) of that kind of pollution and the die-offs are happening in the LEAST polluted areas. Also, it isn't as simple as saying pollution. What kind of pollution? How does it affect the trees? If you don't answer these questions, anything you do could make the problem worse.
Recently there have been alot of odd problems in the coastal forests of California. The worst of them (IMHO) is sudden oak death. Large stands of century old (and older) oaks have been dying due to a pathogen that is similar to the one that caused the irish potato famine. It is also killing bays, madrones and some redwoods. No one really understands why this is happening. If it is due to human action, it is indirectly so, because there are dead stands of trees that are far away from any population centers.
I like my beverages with warning labels!