Slashdot Mirror
Plants Near Chernobyl Adapt To Contaminated Soil
lbalbalba writes "In April 1986, a nuclear reactor at the Chernobyl power plant in Ukraine exploded and sent radioactive particles flying through the air, infiltrating the surrounding soil. Despite the colossal disaster, some plants in the area seem to have adapted well, flourishing in the contaminated soil."
Feed me, Seymour!
Trolling is a art,
in "Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind"?
Adapt or die.
...they are nuclear plants? [ducks]
From TFA - "Scientists had to wear masks, goggles and gloves to work in the area"
Meanwhile the remainder of their body was burnt to a crisp by the radioactivity. Masks, goggles and gloves? This experiment was presumably organised by someone from the Simpsons... (My eyes - the goggles do nothing!)
dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
A rod of applause to you.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
...the cockroach population is also thriving.
I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
Now eat that plant... See what happens. Maybe you get 'immune' maybe you don't :P
Yes, evolution is alive and well. A species of bacteria evolved in the early 70s that can digest nylon.
I think this news is a nice reality check on that annoying but vocal cadre of environmentalists that are always predicting some kind of terrible apocalypse within the next couple of decades. Global cooling, for example. Not to mention a nifty "myth busted" moment for that old Hollywood trope of a post-nuclear wasteland.
I'm definitely not saying we shouldn't take care of our environment, by the way, and I'm certainly not an AGW denialist. The specific way things are now matters a lot to us fickle and fragile humans. If the sea level rises by another yard, the crabs will just move. The Venetians are the ones that would be screwed.
I'm just saying that nature is more resilient than people usually imagine.
I usually consider the BBC to be both a reliable source of info, and capable of quality reporting. I don't doubt the info in this case, but was the article written by monkeys? Or has the distinction between a paragraph and a sentence been deprecated?
I was under the impression that the English are generally more literate than your average North American, seeing as they invented the language and all. But this article is awful.
Wow, I can't tell if you are new here or just retarded. There have been a ton of racists on slashdot long before the black president.
There's plenty of reasons for someone to not like Obama that have nothing to do with the color of his skin, but anyone who speaks out against him is automatically labeled as a racist just to shut them down.
Scientist: Wow! They're thriving!
Plant: (Yeah, that's right b*tch. You better believe it.)
*weeks pass*
Plant: (Eat me. Go on, you know you want to? Look at my lovely leaves, my beautiful drupes. I'm tasty. You KNOW I am. Eat me, human.)
Scientist: Hmmmm...I wonder...
Plant: (That's right, baby. Oh yesssss...verrry good.)
[End Of Line]
Amazing how mother nature always seems to adapt to whatever man throws at it. And people still continue to say we can blow up the world. Earth took hits from asteroids, wiped out the critters, adapted, evolved and moved on. Same thing with any pollution.
Troll Alert : It boggles my mind why people still don't accept evolution as being a close approximation of the truth. I say "close approximation" because even physics is an abstract collection of ideas meant to help our human minds approximate physical laws of our Universe. As a species have had numerous examples of evidence be observed or deduced which support evolution. There is observed evidence, as in this case of plants near Chernobyl as well as others like the peppered moth, and qualitative evidence paired with analysis such as in the case of the varied forms of archaeology. These plants represent a micro-evolutionary step, as some people refer to it. Macroevolution(tau) = Microevolution(100000*t) . Differentiation within a species given enough time diverges the species into parts. Simply put, give it enough time and micro-evolution becomes macro-evolution. If you have some math background you will also deduce my other point; no matter what you call it its evolution.
That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
Under the right circumstances, evolution can be quite fast. The geological history of the earth shows many massive die-offs followed by a tremendous flowering of new life forms. If there is an ecological niche available, something will adapt/evolve to fill it.
Naturally, simpler life forms evolve faster than complex ones. Germs evolve in months. Humans evolve in tens of millennia. Plants are somewhere between the two.
What does this mean for the next Fallout? I don't think it will have the same appeal if it's forested.
Read their method.
They first observe that plants start to spontaneously grow again in contamination sites despite the high radioactivity. Then they brought in seeds from uncontaminated origin. One batch goes to the contamination site, and another batch (the controlled group) goes to a decontaminated area near the site. Seeds grow fine in both batches, showing that seeds from uncontaminated origin is able to survive the radioactivity in the very first generation. The study is about the mechanism how plants naturally resist radioactivity. No evolution is taking place here.
I once had a signature.
Coupl'a things -
1) Chernobyl is not over, and not contained. The "sarcophagus" was temporary at best, is crumbling now, and it's permanent replacement has been beset by budgetary, engineering and political issues that seem irresolvable.
2) Apart from 6' trout and 10' catfish, wildlife around Chernobyl and Pripyat is absolutely not doing well. Excepting a few migratory songbirds, the place is eerily silent.
3) But it's OK, because a few plant species turn out to be radiation-tolerant?
No, not OK. I'm not against nuclear power wholesale, but maybe we should be taking a long, hard look at pebble-bed, 4S and thorium reactors?
"And Humans will adapt by dying out."
The many survivors of atomic testing and nuclear attack suggest otherwise.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
Its rather likely that plants have had to deal with huge amounts of radiation in the past, they have survived extinction events with far more numbers than creatures have so chances are they can deal with radiation better than we can dream of.
"They confiscated everything, even the stuff we didn't steal!"
Could it be that whatever fauna that survived, adapted and/or now thrives might do so under conditions perhaps harsher due to radiation, yet plausibly improved by a potentially reduced presence of any predator species, whom may not have fared as well, or may have been displaced?
That or metro 2033
They were all active that day, talking about the weather, gossiping, and walking around. And right before the scientists and researchers drove in to the site, one of the plants yelled "CAR!" and they all stood still.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
Referencing this Far Side comic?
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://akbar.marlboro.edu/~jsheehy/FarSideCownCar.gif&imgrefurl=http://forums.bicycling.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/632104717/m/5131031146/p/2&usg=__YEficHbVcpMbSLHsx3z_IqK4I1w=&h=428&w=350&sz=37&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=6ED9ukKliivcdM:&tbnh=166&tbnw=136&prev=/images%3Fq%3DThe%2BFar%2BSide%2Btalking%2Bcows%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3DD3c%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26biw%3D1440%26bih%3D650%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=355&ei=yseaTMmhC4KclgegzoSSCg&oei=E8eaTPRNwrvyBpadse8P&esq=21&page=1&ndsp=21&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&tx=81&ty=95
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
"What does not kill me, makes me stronger."
"I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection"
Nietzsche, Darwin, what's the difference.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
Michael Kristopeit? Is that you?
Try mask, sunnies, and a glove.
Did all the plants die off after Chernobyl?
In some areas, yes. See Red Forest. But that doesn't stop plants and animals from making their way back in, however slowly. Sounds like an extreme environment ripe for adaptation/evolution.
ok let's cut your legs, it will make you stronger
Chicks like guys in wheelchairs - maybe he'll get layed!
I'll be darned if the high resistance of plants to ionizing radiation hasnt been documented since at least the 1950s ...
Du kan glomma dina ensama stunder, du kan lita paa teknikens under - Wilmer X
There are lots of things which, while non-fatal, weaken one.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
and how does what you say relate in anyway to:
1) The story?
2) The GPP troll?
Have you played any of the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. games? Unlike Fallout 3, they're more towards the FPS end of the spectrum rather than RPG, but they're also a lot more realistic than the wacky 50s sci-fi feel of the Fallout games and a hell of a lot more bleak. GSC Game World is based in Kiev and they've made multiple trips into the exclusion zone, the maps and the layout of places like Pripyat and the entire Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant are very faithfully reproduced in-game, they did an amazing job.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_RDiKxVBLJZo/SxIu6zDfuFI/AAAAAAAAANE/lnC7nXgLZxs/s1600/stalker-Shadow-of-Chernobyl_03.jpg
http://www.legitreviews.com/images/reviews/490/stalker.jpg
http://www.tweakguides.com/images/STALKER_13.jpg
I think they capture the atmosphere really well, the environment is feral and hostile and you really have to be on the lookout for radiation and anomalies. Shadow Of Chernobyl was the first game, the prequel Clear Sky was a bit of a letdown, but Call Of Pripyat is by far one of the best and most atmospheric games I've ever played.
Eat the rich.
Nietzsche talks about an individual. Darwin talks about a population.
Duh.
Maybe stunning is the wrong word, but interesting.
Back in the day, the USA did a bunch of experiments on the effects of radiation on plants, particularly plants of interest to agriculture. The results were dismaying, at least to anyone planning to grow crops after a nuclear war or a major containment accident. This study suggests that maybe the effects are not as terrible as first believed.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
Plants are very primitive compared to animals, and localized mutations of their cells have nearly no effect on them, so why would they be significantly affected by radioactive contamination in the first place? The whole problem with radioactive contamination and plants is that they can accumulate radioactive isotopes over their lifetime and become dangerous for humans and animals to consume.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
Adapt or die.
Is anyone from the RIAA/MPAA listening?
Even the shrubbery in Russia know that much.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
The flesh may be weak, but the spirit is indomitable.
Visit CryptoGnome in his home.
The plants have almost certainly absorbed radioactive material and incorporated it into their cells. Rather than causing cancer in a plant, this is most likely to just kill a few surrounding cells. The plant itself may be healthy, but no mammal that ate it would be (and since the local mammals will probably learn this quite quickly, the plants will probably do a bit better than normal). This isn't great for agriculture though.
That said, one of the proposals for handling fallout that was floated in the '60s was to plant a lot of fast-growing grasses in the area. They would collect a lot of the radioactive minerals, die, and then you could harvest them and store or process them elsewhere.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The flesh may be weak, but the spirit is indomitable.
Care to spend 5 years in Gitmo? I'll show you how domitable your spirit is.
"What does not kill me, makes me stronger.
What does kill me, I'll deal with when I respawn."
My favourite signature back when I was playing team-based war games.
"Good news, everyone!"
Don't get too close to the local fauna, "feed me Simor, feed me!"
*Bender shines the F-Ray on Fry*
Fry: "Ow my sperm!"
The many survivors of atomic testing and nuclear attack suggest otherwise.
If you were to ask them, I think they're more likely to suggest that nuclear attack is a good way to kill 60,000-166,000 people in a single throw, and that they'd prefer it didn't happen at all.
+1 for sarcasm
+1 for responding as you would to a child
+1 for bolding the obvious, which subtly implies the obvious may be lost to ceoyoyo (59147)
-10 for not rebutting anything ceoyoyo (59147) said
Has anyone looked at the pictures for Pripyat, the abandoned city? It looks so much like any of the towns depicted in Fallout 3 or New Vegas.
Nom de dieu de putain de bordel de merde de saloperie de connard d encule de ta mere.
"What does not kill me, makes me stronger." .
That's what my dad used to say.
Until the accident.
Slashdot: news for Apple. Stuff that Apple.
Not every human would be contaminated to a problematic degree. The human race would certainly survive.
I, for one, welcome our new radiation-enhanced gene-mutated overlords.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
It's in Ukraine. Sure, Ukraine was part of the USSR, but it's not Russia.
"(scientists don't know how to stop the boiling stuff!)"
Funny. I've heard Scientists talk about how certain elements are fission 'poisons' because they absorb neutrons without themselves fissioning and giving of more neutrons. The contexts I've seen the discussions in was how in a working reactor this is undesirable, and how reactors have to be designed to avoid the formation of such elements. It would seem like, in this case, they should be able to inject some quantity of such an element into the molten reactor core and 'poison' the fission happening, so it cools off? Why hasn't anyone tried such a thing? Is it just impossible right now to even safely drill a small hole through the containment to attempt such a poisoning?
I hit submit too soon, I meant to respond to the other part of your post, too.
"And seem to survive for an unknown reason."
I'm no expert on the health effects of radiation exposure, but I've been trying to do some reading on it lately (and plan to do more). If my understanding is correct (which it might not be), if you are exposed to very high levels of radiation, you die quickly - days to weeks, at a somewhat lower magnitude, the radiation kills you slowly (tumors, cancer, etc) - months or a few years. At a lower threshold still, it kills you very slowly - like exposure as an adolescent at this lower level, might lead to you having a shortened life expetency so instead of dieing at 70 or 80, maybe you die in your 50s or 60s from something like a cancer which develops later in life, but not right immediately after exposure, but in the case of someone who was already in their 50s or 60s at the time of such an exposure, it might just not have long enough time to have much effect in shortening your life.
But, in the fairly low-exposure case, it's also my understanding that your reproductive cells can experience genetic mutations that can carry forward to future offspring. Because of that last factor, I've read that some scientists and physicians who specialize in this sort of thing, estimate that something like only 10% of the expected deaths or disabilities due to the Chernobyl disaster will occur within the first generation of those exposed.
We (I mean the whole world when I say we - UN WHO, Ukraine Health Dept, various European national health organizations, the health community in general) really need to keep good data and continuing followup on the populations affected by Chernobyl (much of Europe to one extent or another) over the course of generations, to see what the long-term impacts are, to find out if there actually *is* increased reproductive problems, increased incidences of cancers, etc in the descendants. Also, find out if there's any increase in beneficial mutations too (e.g. improved senses, athleticism, general health, etc).
I've even read that at very very low levels, radiation can be, possibly, pretty beneficial (the term I heard applied was 'hormesis'. However, I think that 'the experts' believe most of the people exposed, were exposed at levels too great for the hormesis effect in most cases.
Over what time frame?
If plants can recolonize a seriously contaminated area after, say, 10-15 years - it doesn't really help humans who need crops continuously. Going a number of years without food is likely to kill a lot of people, even if after a decade or so it's actaully possible to grow crops again.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
If I take my next vacation near Chernobyl, will I come home with superpowers?
If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
As the earlier commenter pointed out, the plants might be poisonous as crops if they aggregate the radioactive materials, so maybe the health of the plants is nothing to be overjoyed about. However, one of the points is that the forests around Chernobyl never died off. There wasn't a period when the area around the reactor completely died. The plants didn't "adapt" to the radiation; they were already adapted to tolerate quite a bit of it.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
You do understand that it is perfectly possible for plant species A mentioned in study B to thrive while animal species C mentioned in study D to do poorly after the Chernobyl accident, right? This study and the one you cite are not producing conflicting information unless you assume all plants and all animals respond to environmental changes identically.
At least you will always find a parking spot.
Another plus is that nobody can step on your toes so it definitely makes you stronger mentally.
On a more serious note: There are currently prostheses which allow you to run faster without legs.
Life finds a way... Malcolm was right!
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Their presence suggests otherwise. What they think about it doesn't matter in an evolutionary sense. A considerable number survived to reproduce.
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
It might even be good for you in moderation.
Is Chronic Radiation an Effective Prophylaxis Against Cancer?
http://www.jpands.org/vol9no1/chen.pdf
. . . it appears that significant beneficial health effects may be associated with this chronic radiation exposure.
End MGM. Get prospective parents of boys to Google: Men do complain