Slashdot Mirror
One of the World's Largest Organisms is Shrinking (sciencemag.org)
An anonymous reader shares a report: The Pando aspen grove, located in central Utah, is the largest organism on the planet by weight. From the surface, it may look like a forest that spans more than 100 U.S. football fields, but each tree shares the exact same DNA and is connected to its clonal brethren through an elaborate underground root system. Although not quite as large in terms of area as the massive Armillaria gallica fungus in Michigan, Pando is much heavier, weighing in at more than 6 million kilograms. Now, researchers say, the grove is in danger, being slowly eaten away by mule deer and other herbivores -- and putting the fate of its ecosystem in jeopardy. "This is a really unusual habitat type," says Luke Painter, an ecologist at Oregon State University in Corvallis who was not involved with the research. "A lot of animals depend on it."
[...] Scientists first noticed the Pando shrinking in the late '90s. They suspected elk, cattle, and most prominently deer were eating the new shoots, so in the new study Rogers and colleagues divided the forest into three experimental groups. One section was completely unfenced, allowing animals to forage freely on the baby aspen. A second section was fenced and left alone. And a third section was fenced and then treated in some places with strategies to spur aspen growth, such as shrub removal and controlled burning; in other places it was left untreated. The results were surprising: Simply keeping the deer out was enough to allow the grove to successfully recover, the team reports today in PLOS ONE. Even in the fenced-off plots where there was no burning or shrub removal, young trees were thriving.
[...] Scientists first noticed the Pando shrinking in the late '90s. They suspected elk, cattle, and most prominently deer were eating the new shoots, so in the new study Rogers and colleagues divided the forest into three experimental groups. One section was completely unfenced, allowing animals to forage freely on the baby aspen. A second section was fenced and left alone. And a third section was fenced and then treated in some places with strategies to spur aspen growth, such as shrub removal and controlled burning; in other places it was left untreated. The results were surprising: Simply keeping the deer out was enough to allow the grove to successfully recover, the team reports today in PLOS ONE. Even in the fenced-off plots where there was no burning or shrub removal, young trees were thriving.
Scientists: "Hey this tree thing is shrinking...we believe it's because deer and other animals eat it...let's test that!"
*results show deer eating really was the cause*
Scientists: WE ARE SO SURPRISED THAT WE WERE RIGHT!
Why was that suprising?
Michael Moore is losing pounds because he hasn't had a hit movie in a while, that's all. This has no connection with global wa--
Oh, wait!
We'd have a lot more biodiversity if it wasn't for these pesky animals.
Glad to hear OP's mom finally went on that diet
On my last visit to family in Michigan, deer were everywhere. And they are being pests. I say: larger quotas for hunting season. Same for this area. Venison jerky is very tasty. What say you Eco folks? Save the trees, or save the deer?
"The quality of life is determined by its activites."--Aristotle
Sounds like a problem for wolves. Did they get rid of the wolves?
Big, Yummy Rodents.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Time to reintroduce some wolves to the area. They were having similar issues in Yellowstone National Park. Once wolves were brought back into the park, the deer stopped browsing on the trees, causing the forests to regrow, bringing back bird habitat and so forth.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
The problem is a lack of apex predators. The deer population has expanded past a sustainable level.
In the past decade, biologists have recorded strong rebounds in the population of trout in Wyoming rivers, less sediment in the water, and higher oxygen levels. Why? Wolves. When the wolves came back to Yellowstone, the behavior of the deer and elk changed. They spend more time on higher ground, and along ridge lines where they are safer from ambush, and much less time browsing in stream beds where they destroy vegetation and stir up sediment. When the apex predators returned, they had a dramatic effect on the entire ecosystem.
A reintroduction of wolves to central Utah would reduce the deer population, but also change their behavior. Another option would be to use biotechnology to bring back the American lion.
Take some of that money for a border wall and put one up around Pando. No excuse for building a fence that mule deer can force their way through, or leap over. Then go ahead and declare extended hunting seasons on mule deer while we are at it.
Deers in Utah have tested positive for a prion disease and (human) hunters are wary of eating those deer(or even touching them, prions are basically impossible to destroy).
Unfortunately, the apex predator that you mention, humans, are restricted from hunting in the grove because human homes are too close.
Year-round bow season. Problem solved.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
The problem is a lack of apex predators.
We are the apex predators. We used to hunt deer. Now we don't nearly as much. We should hunt and eat deer again.
So, let's get this straight. The biggest/heaviest/oldest/whatever massively successful life-form. . .needs our help.
Yeah, right.
Maybe, just maybe, like everything else, it too has cycles of growth and destruction.
Trees are weird.
The tree in your backyard can take ten years to die, and another ten to fall over.
There are species of trees that benefit from forest fires -- yup, fire-retardant wood.
Trees are probably the largest life-forms on the planet.
The smallest seeds of any plant come from trees -- I think they are even smaller than many mammal seeds.
The jump to "we can help!" is a wonderful one, but it really requires that something is wrong in the first place. Not every obstacle is a bad thing -- see "lawnmower parenting".
Maybe there are fewer wolves, more deers, they'll eat down the trees, then the more deer population will roam farther to find more food, then they'll encounter wolves, who'll follow the deer population all the way back, and the trees will thrive again.
Most trees benefit from significant pruning on an infrequent-yet-cyclical basis.
Most of nature works on cycles. I'd wager that absolutely nothing in nature benefits from being static in any way.
Alan Watts agrees. Beauty/Life, when magnified, reveals conflict. A lack of conflict, when demagnified, reveals death.
I should think that historical stats would win-out. It's a successful life-form, don't screw with it!
Or just leave nature the fuck alone. The deer have more a right to the grove than humans do.
Why would the deer have more of a right than humans? Humans are part of the ecosystem too. Humans don't live outside the ecosystem, we are as much a part of the ecosystem as the deer. If we assume that humans did live outside of the ecosystem then what does that mean for us? That we cannot take some of the deer for our food? Or eat the fruit from trees like the deer?
Peopel are animals too!!
CWD has been found in 6 hunting units and less then 100 deer total in Utah so far. CWD has no reported cases of jumping the species barrier. You can get your deer tested for $25 and if you are hunting a unit that has had confirmed CWD cases you are asked to get the deer tested and I believe they wave the fees. I don't believe most Utah hunters have even heard of CWD at this point and I know no one who has any problem touching or eating deer because of it.
And let's elk and deer pay for it!
4wdloop
and I know no one who has any problem touching or eating deer because of it.
You will.
Because in nut-land there can only be one answer to all situations everywhere in the world.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
We are the apex predators. We used to hunt deer. Now we don't nearly as much. We should hunt and eat deer again.
Barefoot, with spears.
For those of you unfamiliar with American football, 100 U.S. football fields is about 2.75 Libraries of Congress.
(Kidding aside, it's a bit more than half a million square meters.)
If you actually read the post you're replying to you'd note they talk about something human predation doesnt help with: behavioral change.
Reintroduction of wolves in a number of places, notably, as the GP mentioned, Yellowstone, changes the behavior of prey animals and other members of the ecosystem. Humans just culling deer during hunting season doesnt do that.
"goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
We are the apex predators. We used to hunt deer. Now we don't nearly as much. We should hunt and eat deer again.
Barefoot, with spears.
Spears are for wimps. Real men just use rocks.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
or you know. deer tastes good.
pussy. i punch my deer.
Please don't write 6 million Kilograms. You are literally writing 6 million thousand grams. Either write 6 billion grams, or preferably use the SI system as it was intended and express it as 6 Gigagrams.
The numbers are ridiculous even in the metro area. They had to start culling numbers.
In California, the overpopulation of mule deer causes serious environmental destruction, erosion from over grazing, and even the near extinction of some tree species (they eat the seedlings). But every proposal to cull the deer is stopped by urban voters who think they are "saving Bambi's mother".
So far studies have not shown it to be transmittable to humans. But states with it usually have a way to get your animal tested.
Just to expand on this prionic diseases can often take decades to manifest in the victim.
love is just extroverted narcissism
The two largest organisms in the world turn out to be in the US? Sounds like sample bias to me.
Wolves are gone, and we don't want them back.
Wanting wolves back, is like the antivax group thinking not vaxing is safe. The amount of damage they will do from live stock to the safety of people.
I can't stat e this enough; Wolves and humans do not mix! Do you think animals that can take down things bigger than us like elk and moose wont cause problems for us? I'm not just talking about livestock, or pets, but also kids, even adults! There is a reason why man purposely removed wolves.
Let man be the apex predator, do not re-introduce wolves!
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
While some of you will look at me like I am crazy, a simple yet observable fact can be noted
( and I believe already documented in Yosemite ). Before the wolves introduction, river banks
and the plains that lead up to them were lacking in tree growth. Once the wolves were established,
grazing animals had to look for water in other locations or drink quickly from the past location.
Wolves hunt in the grazing areas.
This, of course, needs to be revalidated since it's been at least 10 years since I've paid any
attention to wolves growth and habits. But I feel that it should still hold.
if someone finds a citation to help validate I will be very grateful.
if you see me, smile and say hello.
While some of you will look at me like I am crazy, a simple yet observable fact can be noted
( and I believe already documented in Yosemite ). Before the wolves introduction, river banks
and the plains that lead up to them were lacking in tree growth. Once the wolves were established,
grazing animals had to look for water in other locations or drink quickly from the past location.
Wolves hunt in the grazing areas.
This, of course, needs to be revalidated since it's been at least 10 years since I've paid any
attention to wolves growth and habits. But I feel that it should still hold.
if someone finds a citation to help validate I will be very grateful.
and you are right, Wolves and Humans should not mix. but the loss of cattle is minimal when
you look at all the deer around. and good wolf policy should protect the rancher. Besides,
who the heck goes out on a ranch without a sidearm. every rancher I know has a gun
holstered just for the sake of protection from cattle or human or critter.
if you see me, smile and say hello.
As a kid, I was friends with a true Indian Family from the wilds of the midwest.
I knew more about how to live off the land than I could ever imagine, learned
some real weird shit that to this day, I never worry about camping, I just know
how to do things.
about deer:
I learned how to deer tap. I never had the courage to try that with a bear.
deer tapping is the art of stalking a deer in fresh wood in the autumn while
they are rutting and mad as heck. the goal is simple, slap one in the rump
and run for your life and not get raked. fastest I've ever done was 3 hours of
stalking.
so yes, a spear would be fun.
if you see me, smile and say hello.
Prion diseases are not something that many people even want to risk. If you want to tempt fate, be my guest
Yes a bit over half a million square meters (640000 square yards) which is about 53 ha (132 acres), and they say it is smaller than Armillaria gallica, but that is "only" 15 ha (37 acres): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
This is true of european grey wolves. Only the timid ones that know to stay away from people survived. There are some arctic wolves that never developed this fear because they managed to live far from people. There's a video somewhere of them coming across people and being curious but not afraid or at all aggressive.
Hey guys! The world is not a static place. Things change.
Soap bubbles are very pretty, but they don't last long. Neither does anything else in the world. Appreciate what you see when you see it but stop trying to keep it. You can't keep it and it is a mental disease to try.
Just stop.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Re: American lion
"In 2008, the American lion was estimated to weigh up to 420 kg (930 lb)." That is a truly terrifying animal considering how dangerous a cougar is and according to Wikipedia cougars max out around 220 kg. The minimum weight estimated for an adult American lion is 175 kg.
A predatory cat the size of the modern grizzly bear is the stuff of nightmares.
I'm all for the reintroduction of a lion 25% bigger than modern day lions. There couldn't possibly be unforeseen consequences to doing that!
So why is it up to us to choose whether the grove wins, or the animals feeding on it? Isn't this what nature dues? Different organisms are always vying for growth, many times at the expense of others. It's how nature balances itself. Why is this bad news?